5 ms·

A lot of this type of stuff boils down to what you're used to. My wife is not particularly tech savvy. She is a Linux user, however. When we started a new busi

A lot of this type of stuff boils down to what you're used to. My wife is not particularly tech savvy. She is a Linux user, however. When we started a new business, we needed certain applications that only run on Windows and since she would be at the brick and mortar location full time, I figured we could multi-purpose a new laptop for her and have her switch to Windows. She hated it and begged for us to get a dedicated Windows laptop for that stuff so she could go back to Linux. Some of you might suggest that she has me for tech support, which is true, but I can't actually remember the last time she asked me to troubleshoot something for her with her laptop. The occasions that do come to mind are usually hardware failure related. Obviously the thing about generlizations is that they're never going to fit all individuals uniformly. My wife might be an edge case. But she feels at home using Linux, as it's what she's used to ... and strongly loathed using Windows when it was offered to her. I feel that kind of way about Mac vs PC as well. I am a lifelong PC user, and also a "power user." I have extremely particular preferences when it comes to my UI and keyboard mappings and fonts and windowing features. When I was forced to use a Mac for work, I honestly considered looking for a different position because it was just that painful for me. Nothing wrong with Mac OS X, a lot of people love it. But I was 10% as productive on it when compared to what I'm used to... and I'm "old dog" enough that it was just too much change to be able to bear and work with.

cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
Familiarity is massively undersold in the Linux desktop adoption discussion. Having desktop environments that are near 1:1 clones of the commercial platforms (preferably paired with a distribution that's designed to be bulletproof and practically never requires its user to fire up a terminal window) would go so far for making Linux viable for users sitting in the middle of the bell curve of technical capability. It's one of those situations where "close enough" isn't. The fine details matter.
- zahlman 11mo ago
  What do you see as wrong or missing "fine details" in, say, Cinnamon?
  - cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
    Assuming that the point of comparison is Windows (since it’s a rough XP/7 analogue), any difference in behaviors, patterns, or conventions that might differ from what a long time Windows user would expect, including things that some might write off as insignificant. In particular, anything relating to the user’s muscle memory (such as key shortcuts, menu item positions, etc) needs to match. The DE needs to be as close to a drop-in replacement as possible while remaining legally distinct. The less the user needs to relearn the better.
    - mort96 11mo ago
      For example, practically every text box in practically every Linux system handles ctrl+backspace by deleting a word. This clashes with a Windows user's expectation that ctrl+backspace deletes a word in some system applications while inserting a small square character in others.
- array_key_first 11mo ago
  The main problem with this is that the commercial offerings are pretty much just bad. Windows isn't the way it is because of some purposeful design or anything. No, it's decades of poor decisions after poor decisions. Nothing, and I do mean nothing, is intuitive on Windows. It's familiar! But it is not intuitive. If you conform to what these commercial offerings do, you are actively making your software worse. On purpose. You're actively programming in baggage from 25 years ago... in your greenfield project.
  - Nathanba 11mo ago
    I don't even think that it remained very familiar aside from a taskbar (that also changed in win11) and the fact that there are desktop icons when you install things via double clicking (the double click installing also optionally changed with the Microsoft store and the msi installers are almost entirely gone these days, totally different uis pop up now). Even core things that people definitely use like the uninstallation, settings etc. ui has changed completely for the worse. Windows has also changed a lot of its core ui over the years like the taskbar, the clock, the startmenu etc. I guess one thing you could say is that it was a gradual change over many versions but everytime people hate it. Really, what Linux should have done is what Windows has done with WSL: Offer a builtin compatability layer so that you can install windows apps on linux, perhaps prompting you to enter a windows license and then it will launch those apps in a VM, even per window/app.
- Forgeties79 11mo ago
  > Familiarity is massively undersold in the Linux desktop adoption discussion Totally agree. My first distro was Elementary because it was sold to me as Mac-like. It’s…sort of that, but it was enough for me to stick with it and now I’ve tried 3 other distros! Elementary is still in place in my n150 server. Bazzite for my big gaming machine. Messed with Mint briefly, wasn’t for me but I appreciated what it was. Familiarity is so important.
- LtWorf 11mo ago
  Lol, have you not noticed how every version of windows moves everything and the users are no longer able to do anything?
- pessimizer 11mo ago
  No, this is poison. They constantly change things, and Free Software would be racing to clone them, continually leaving familiarity behind in order to be a wonky version of the real thing. That battle is lost when it starts. Firefox was a great version of Firefox, everybody loved it (except when it locked up the entire system), nobody thought it was a knock-off of IE. Firefox then became a shit version of Chrome (I assume on Google's orders), and eventually developed into a good enough version of Chrome, shedding all of its users along the way. The Linux desktop is doing better than Firefox now. The advantage to Free Software is that you don't have to change everything with Windows, Apple, Adobe, or Google demand you do (unless they grab control of a FOSS project, like in Firefox's case.) There are a number of writers who recommend Linux and Free software only for that reason - that once you get a workflow going, you don't want to change it according to corporate whims. > practically never requires its user to fire up a terminal window This can be a problem. But it will be less of a problem with LLMs. We need to encourage amateur (and proficient) Linux adopters and users to lean on AI to deal with anything giving them problems. I had an LLM walk me through updating a .deb package in MATE to match HEAD upstream, and to do it in a way that would be replaced when Debian updated the package itself. This is something I've been carefully avoiding learning for a decade, and if I had taken the effort to try to learn, it would be weeks of research and I'd have messed up the system multiple times along the way. Instead, after a few false starts, I did it and gained the knowledge to do it again.
  - cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
    It's not necessary to chase, just copy what Windows users have largely agreed to be good and stick to that. So for example, a hypothetical Windows DE could offer XP, 7, and 10 modes which the user can freely switch between which would never change. This delivers on two fronts: first, it presents a familiar, comfortable UI for the user, and second, it offers a promise that most of the popular Linux desktops do not which is that significant changes will not occur, even over long time scales. I disagree on LLMs/terminal use. Too many things can go wrong in too many different ways for LLMs to be of much use to users for troubleshooting in many cases, and there's also the issue of the user even knowing what to ask for in the first place (even many moderately technical users aren't going to have the foggiest clue what a Debian package, MATE, HEAD, or upstream are). The system really just needs to be engineered to 1) be extremely robust and not break in the first place 2) when it does break, have the ability to silently self-heal 99% of the time. A non-essential but excellent bonus would be 3) to be able to express what's wrong and what needs to be done to the user in that last 1%. This won't be easy to accomplish, but the first distro that does will be richly rewarded with user loyalty.
singhrac 11mo ago
One summer in middle school our family computer failed. We bought a new motherboard from Microcenter but it didn’t come with a Windows license, so I proposed we just try Ubuntu for a while. My mom had no trouble adjusting to it. It was all just computer to her in some ways.
- trenchpilgrim 11mo ago
  Same, my mom ran Linux for years in the Vista days cuz her PC was too slow for Windows. She was fine. She even preferred Libreoffice over the Office ribbon interface.
- theandrewbailey 11mo ago
  Sometime around 2012, Windows XP started having issues on my parent's PC, so I installed Xubuntu on it (my preferred distro at the time). I told them that "it works like Windows", showed them how to check email, browse the web, play solitare, and shut down. Even the random HP printer + scanner they had worked great! I went back home 2 states away, and expected a call from them to "put it back to what it was", but it never happened. (The closest was Mom wondering why solitare (the gnome-games version) was different, then guided her on how to change the game type to klondike.) If "it [Xubuntu] works like Windows" offended you, I'd like to point out that normies don't care about how operating system kernels are designed. You're part of the problem this simplified Handbrake UI tries to solve. Normies care about things like a start menu, and that the X in the corner closes programs. The interface is paramount for non-technical users. I currently work in the refurb division of an e-waste recycling company.[0] Most everyone else there installs Ubuntu on laptops (we don't have the license to sell things with Windows), and I started to initially, but an error always appeared on boot. Consider unpacking it and turning it on for the first time, and an error immediately appears: would you wonder if what you just bought is already broken? I eventually settled on Linux Mint with the OEM install option. [0] https://www.ebay.com/str/evolutionecycling https://www.ebay.com/str/evolutionecycling
  - Forgeties79 11mo ago
    Mint is definitely what I recommend to people who hate windows now but are nervous about swapping to Linux. Bazzite if they’re gamers.
le-mark 11mo ago
> When I was forced to use a Mac for work, I honestly considered looking for a different position because it was just that painful for me. I share this aversion. I have a Mac book work sent me, sitting next to me right now, that I never use. Luckily I’m able to access the vpn via Linux and all the apps I need have web interfaces (office 365).
- asimovDev 11mo ago
  won't you get in trouble for using a personal device for accessing work resources?
tombert 11mo ago
I grew up using Windows but have been using Linux and Mac almost exclusively for the past fifteen years; the only exposure I get to Windows is when I have to play tech support for my parents [1]. I hated OS X when I first used it. A lot, actually. I didn't consider leaving my job over it (I couldn't have afforded it at the time even if I had wanted to), but I did think about trying to do an ultimatum with that employer to tell them to buy me a computer with Windows or let me install Linux on the Macbook (this was 2012 so it had the Intel chip). I got let go from that job before I really got a chance (which itself is a whole strange story), but regardless I really hated macOS at the time. It wasn't until a few years later and a couple jobs after that I ended up growing to really like macOS, when Mavericks released, and a few years later, I actually ended up getting a job at Apple and I refuse to allow anyone to run Windows in my house. My point is, I think people can actually learn and appreciate new platforms if they're given a chance. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45708530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45708530
- bruce511 11mo ago
  I agree, people can learn and appreciate if given the chance. But they've more important things to do so changing OS is just a distraction. I know, techies love to love or hate the OS. Here there are endless threads waxing lyrical about Windows, MacOS or say dozen Linux installs. But 99% of users could care less. It's kinda like cars. Petrol heads will talk cars for ages. Engine specs. What brand of oil. Gearbox ratios. Whereas I'm like 99% of people - I get in my car to go somewhere. Pretty much the only "feature" a car needs is to make me not worry about getting there. So for 97% of people the "best" OS is the one they don't notice. The one that's invisible because they want to run a program, and it just runs. The problem with switching my mom to Linux is not the OS. It's all the programs she uses. And while they might (or might not) be "equivalent" they're not the same. And I'm not interested in re-teaching her every bit of software, and she's not interested in relearning every bit of software. She's not on "a journey" of software discovery. She has arrived. Changing now is just a waste of time she could be gardening or whatever. The reason it'll never be the year for Linux Desktop is the same reason it's always been - it's not there already.
  - 11mo ago
globular-toast 11mo ago
What you're used to is definitely a huge part of it. But I do think 10-15 years ago Linux was easier to break than Windows, because it didn't make any effort to hide away the bits that let you break it. This was mainly a matter of taste. People who know what they're doing don't want to use some sanitised sandbox. Linux was like a racing car. Raw and refined. Every control was directly connected to powerful mechanical components, like a throttle, clutch and steering rack. It did exactly what you told it to do, but to be good at it requires learning to finesse the controls. If you failed, the lessons the were delivered swiftly and harshly: you would lose traction, spin and crash. Windows was more like a daily driver. Things were "easier", but that the cost of having less raw control and power, like a clutch with a huge dual mass flywheel. It's not like you can't break a daily driver, any experienced computer guy has surely broken Windows more than once, but you can just do more within the confines o the sandbox. Linux required you to leave. It's different now. Distros like Ubuntu do almost everything most people want without having to leave the sandbox. The beautiful part about Linux, though, is it's still all there if you want it and nice to use if you get there, because it's build and designed by people who actually do that stuff. Nowadays I tend to agree it is mostly just what you're used to and what you've already learnt.
e40 11mo ago
I too was a Windows power user. Never thought I could use macOS. It was painful to start, but ultimately it was far better than what I had on Windows. You just have to put in the work. I did this conversion after I was 50.
vladms 11mo ago
> Nothing wrong with Mac OS X In fact, when I had a similar experience I ended up making a short list (which I since lost) of things that seemed terribly wrong UI wise. True, overall Mac is just different. The issue that I have with that ecosystem is the too many people consider it "perfect" and don't even consider discussing issues and complaining about things. Every product has pluses and minuses, but if you the user "believes blindly" that "there is only one way" that is probably not good for anybody. After a couple of weeks I adapted just fine to using the Mac, but I surely don't miss it either.
- latexr 11mo ago
  > too many people consider it "perfect" and don't even consider discussing issues and complaining about things. That is becoming less and less true. More and more of the most ardent Apple fans have been complaining about the direction of macOS for years. Developer sentiment is low.
  - presbyterian 11mo ago
    I've been a huge Mac fan for a decade or more, at least, and not only is Tahoe the least popular release I've seen, it's the first one where the majority of people I hear from dislike it. It's bad enough that I haven't updated still, I'm waiting a few point releases at least to see how they fix it up, and I'm trying out Linux distros to see what I'll start using if I have to move away.
    - Forgeties79 11mo ago
      Mac->Linux swapper here (back in April). I left after they screwed me on a hardware situation. Honestly I’ve really enjoyed the swap. But man I really miss having iMessages across my devices as well as the shared clipboard. By far the two things I missed the most. Everything else I’ve kind of moved on from and can’t even think of off the top of my head anymore
      - Max-Limelihood 11mo ago
abustamam 11mo ago
I grew up with windows. Used it until after college when I was gifted a MacBook pro for dev work. I used parallels to keep a windows box close by (I think I only ever used up to Vista), but then eventually I just went full Mac and got used to the interface and key bindings. It's a fine interface, not amazing, not terrible, but I can get around. And every job I've had basically required a Mac anyway. Years later, I built a gaming machine so obviously I needed Windows. Got Win10 and eventually upgraded to 11 and it's just so jarring how unusable it is. In older windows I could click on my computer to see all my drives and files. Now I have no idea where it is so I just click on the little folder icon at the bottom which opens I think my home directory, then I have to click on somewhere else to see my C and D drives. I can probably make a desktop shortcut or something but point being is that it's un intuitive. And powershell is not a great terminal, and I haven't found one for windows. SO, after learning that gaming works well on Linux, I recently switched to Ubuntu, and I haven't looked back. Gaming, AI workflows, everything I need works just perfectly, and if it doesn't I can easily customize things to work the way I want it to. I'm not treated as a criminal for installing software on my computer. It's awesome.
helterskelter 11mo ago
Same story here. My wife is not tech savvy at all but she likes Linux because it mostly just gets out of her way and the desktop doesn't really change drastically between updates. I haven't had to help her do anything on it in over a decade except get an old PC game up with Wine.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]

cosmic_cheese 11mo ago

Familiarity is massively undersold in the Linux desktop adoption discussion. Having desktop environments that are near 1:1 clones of the commercial platforms (preferably paired with a distribution that's designed to be bulletproof and practically never requires its user to fire up a terminal window) would go so far for making Linux viable for users sitting in the middle of the bell curve of technical capability. It's one of those situations where "close enough" isn't. The fine details matter.

zahlman 11mo ago
What do you see as wrong or missing "fine details" in, say, Cinnamon?
- cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
  Assuming that the point of comparison is Windows (since it’s a rough XP/7 analogue), any difference in behaviors, patterns, or conventions that might differ from what a long time Windows user would expect, including things that some might write off as insignificant. In particular, anything relating to the user’s muscle memory (such as key shortcuts, menu item positions, etc) needs to match. The DE needs to be as close to a drop-in replacement as possible while remaining legally distinct. The less the user needs to relearn the better.
  - mort96 11mo ago
    For example, practically every text box in practically every Linux system handles ctrl+backspace by deleting a word. This clashes with a Windows user's expectation that ctrl+backspace deletes a word in some system applications while inserting a small square character in others.
array_key_first 11mo ago
The main problem with this is that the commercial offerings are pretty much just bad. Windows isn't the way it is because of some purposeful design or anything. No, it's decades of poor decisions after poor decisions. Nothing, and I do mean nothing, is intuitive on Windows. It's familiar! But it is not intuitive. If you conform to what these commercial offerings do, you are actively making your software worse. On purpose. You're actively programming in baggage from 25 years ago... in your greenfield project.
- Nathanba 11mo ago
  I don't even think that it remained very familiar aside from a taskbar (that also changed in win11) and the fact that there are desktop icons when you install things via double clicking (the double click installing also optionally changed with the Microsoft store and the msi installers are almost entirely gone these days, totally different uis pop up now). Even core things that people definitely use like the uninstallation, settings etc. ui has changed completely for the worse. Windows has also changed a lot of its core ui over the years like the taskbar, the clock, the startmenu etc. I guess one thing you could say is that it was a gradual change over many versions but everytime people hate it. Really, what Linux should have done is what Windows has done with WSL: Offer a builtin compatability layer so that you can install windows apps on linux, perhaps prompting you to enter a windows license and then it will launch those apps in a VM, even per window/app.
Forgeties79 11mo ago
> Familiarity is massively undersold in the Linux desktop adoption discussion Totally agree. My first distro was Elementary because it was sold to me as Mac-like. It’s…sort of that, but it was enough for me to stick with it and now I’ve tried 3 other distros! Elementary is still in place in my n150 server. Bazzite for my big gaming machine. Messed with Mint briefly, wasn’t for me but I appreciated what it was. Familiarity is so important.
LtWorf 11mo ago
Lol, have you not noticed how every version of windows moves everything and the users are no longer able to do anything?
pessimizer 11mo ago
No, this is poison. They constantly change things, and Free Software would be racing to clone them, continually leaving familiarity behind in order to be a wonky version of the real thing. That battle is lost when it starts. Firefox was a great version of Firefox, everybody loved it (except when it locked up the entire system), nobody thought it was a knock-off of IE. Firefox then became a shit version of Chrome (I assume on Google's orders), and eventually developed into a good enough version of Chrome, shedding all of its users along the way. The Linux desktop is doing better than Firefox now. The advantage to Free Software is that you don't have to change everything with Windows, Apple, Adobe, or Google demand you do (unless they grab control of a FOSS project, like in Firefox's case.) There are a number of writers who recommend Linux and Free software only for that reason - that once you get a workflow going, you don't want to change it according to corporate whims. > practically never requires its user to fire up a terminal window This can be a problem. But it will be less of a problem with LLMs. We need to encourage amateur (and proficient) Linux adopters and users to lean on AI to deal with anything giving them problems. I had an LLM walk me through updating a .deb package in MATE to match HEAD upstream, and to do it in a way that would be replaced when Debian updated the package itself. This is something I've been carefully avoiding learning for a decade, and if I had taken the effort to try to learn, it would be weeks of research and I'd have messed up the system multiple times along the way. Instead, after a few false starts, I did it and gained the knowledge to do it again.
- cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
  It's not necessary to chase, just copy what Windows users have largely agreed to be good and stick to that. So for example, a hypothetical Windows DE could offer XP, 7, and 10 modes which the user can freely switch between which would never change. This delivers on two fronts: first, it presents a familiar, comfortable UI for the user, and second, it offers a promise that most of the popular Linux desktops do not which is that significant changes will not occur, even over long time scales. I disagree on LLMs/terminal use. Too many things can go wrong in too many different ways for LLMs to be of much use to users for troubleshooting in many cases, and there's also the issue of the user even knowing what to ask for in the first place (even many moderately technical users aren't going to have the foggiest clue what a Debian package, MATE, HEAD, or upstream are). The system really just needs to be engineered to 1) be extremely robust and not break in the first place 2) when it does break, have the ability to silently self-heal 99% of the time. A non-essential but excellent bonus would be 3) to be able to express what's wrong and what needs to be done to the user in that last 1%. This won't be easy to accomplish, but the first distro that does will be richly rewarded with user loyalty.

singhrac 11mo ago

One summer in middle school our family computer failed. We bought a new motherboard from Microcenter but it didn’t come with a Windows license, so I proposed we just try Ubuntu for a while. My mom had no trouble adjusting to it. It was all just computer to her in some ways.

trenchpilgrim 11mo ago
Same, my mom ran Linux for years in the Vista days cuz her PC was too slow for Windows. She was fine. She even preferred Libreoffice over the Office ribbon interface.
theandrewbailey 11mo ago
Sometime around 2012, Windows XP started having issues on my parent's PC, so I installed Xubuntu on it (my preferred distro at the time). I told them that "it works like Windows", showed them how to check email, browse the web, play solitare, and shut down. Even the random HP printer + scanner they had worked great! I went back home 2 states away, and expected a call from them to "put it back to what it was", but it never happened. (The closest was Mom wondering why solitare (the gnome-games version) was different, then guided her on how to change the game type to klondike.) If "it [Xubuntu] works like Windows" offended you, I'd like to point out that normies don't care about how operating system kernels are designed. You're part of the problem this simplified Handbrake UI tries to solve. Normies care about things like a start menu, and that the X in the corner closes programs. The interface is paramount for non-technical users. I currently work in the refurb division of an e-waste recycling company.[0] Most everyone else there installs Ubuntu on laptops (we don't have the license to sell things with Windows), and I started to initially, but an error always appeared on boot. Consider unpacking it and turning it on for the first time, and an error immediately appears: would you wonder if what you just bought is already broken? I eventually settled on Linux Mint with the OEM install option. [0] https://www.ebay.com/str/evolutionecycling https://www.ebay.com/str/evolutionecycling
- Forgeties79 11mo ago
  Mint is definitely what I recommend to people who hate windows now but are nervous about swapping to Linux. Bazzite if they’re gamers.

le-mark 11mo ago

> When I was forced to use a Mac for work, I honestly considered looking for a different position because it was just that painful for me. I share this aversion. I have a Mac book work sent me, sitting next to me right now, that I never use. Luckily I’m able to access the vpn via Linux and all the apps I need have web interfaces (office 365).

asimovDev 11mo ago
won't you get in trouble for using a personal device for accessing work resources?

tombert 11mo ago

I grew up using Windows but have been using Linux and Mac almost exclusively for the past fifteen years; the only exposure I get to Windows is when I have to play tech support for my parents [1]. I hated OS X when I first used it. A lot, actually. I didn't consider leaving my job over it (I couldn't have afforded it at the time even if I had wanted to), but I did think about trying to do an ultimatum with that employer to tell them to buy me a computer with Windows or let me install Linux on the Macbook (this was 2012 so it had the Intel chip). I got let go from that job before I really got a chance (which itself is a whole strange story), but regardless I really hated macOS at the time. It wasn't until a few years later and a couple jobs after that I ended up growing to really like macOS, when Mavericks released, and a few years later, I actually ended up getting a job at Apple and I refuse to allow anyone to run Windows in my house. My point is, I think people can actually learn and appreciate new platforms if they're given a chance. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45708530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45708530

bruce511 11mo ago
I agree, people can learn and appreciate if given the chance. But they've more important things to do so changing OS is just a distraction. I know, techies love to love or hate the OS. Here there are endless threads waxing lyrical about Windows, MacOS or say dozen Linux installs. But 99% of users could care less. It's kinda like cars. Petrol heads will talk cars for ages. Engine specs. What brand of oil. Gearbox ratios. Whereas I'm like 99% of people - I get in my car to go somewhere. Pretty much the only "feature" a car needs is to make me not worry about getting there. So for 97% of people the "best" OS is the one they don't notice. The one that's invisible because they want to run a program, and it just runs. The problem with switching my mom to Linux is not the OS. It's all the programs she uses. And while they might (or might not) be "equivalent" they're not the same. And I'm not interested in re-teaching her every bit of software, and she's not interested in relearning every bit of software. She's not on "a journey" of software discovery. She has arrived. Changing now is just a waste of time she could be gardening or whatever. The reason it'll never be the year for Linux Desktop is the same reason it's always been - it's not there already.
- 11mo ago

globular-toast 11mo ago

What you're used to is definitely a huge part of it. But I do think 10-15 years ago Linux was easier to break than Windows, because it didn't make any effort to hide away the bits that let you break it. This was mainly a matter of taste. People who know what they're doing don't want to use some sanitised sandbox. Linux was like a racing car. Raw and refined. Every control was directly connected to powerful mechanical components, like a throttle, clutch and steering rack. It did exactly what you told it to do, but to be good at it requires learning to finesse the controls. If you failed, the lessons the were delivered swiftly and harshly: you would lose traction, spin and crash. Windows was more like a daily driver. Things were "easier", but that the cost of having less raw control and power, like a clutch with a huge dual mass flywheel. It's not like you can't break a daily driver, any experienced computer guy has surely broken Windows more than once, but you can just do more within the confines o the sandbox. Linux required you to leave. It's different now. Distros like Ubuntu do almost everything most people want without having to leave the sandbox. The beautiful part about Linux, though, is it's still all there if you want it and nice to use if you get there, because it's build and designed by people who actually do that stuff. Nowadays I tend to agree it is mostly just what you're used to and what you've already learnt.

e40 11mo ago

I too was a Windows power user. Never thought I could use macOS. It was painful to start, but ultimately it was far better than what I had on Windows. You just have to put in the work. I did this conversion after I was 50.

vladms 11mo ago

> Nothing wrong with Mac OS X In fact, when I had a similar experience I ended up making a short list (which I since lost) of things that seemed terribly wrong UI wise. True, overall Mac is just different. The issue that I have with that ecosystem is the too many people consider it "perfect" and don't even consider discussing issues and complaining about things. Every product has pluses and minuses, but if you the user "believes blindly" that "there is only one way" that is probably not good for anybody. After a couple of weeks I adapted just fine to using the Mac, but I surely don't miss it either.

latexr 11mo ago
> too many people consider it "perfect" and don't even consider discussing issues and complaining about things. That is becoming less and less true. More and more of the most ardent Apple fans have been complaining about the direction of macOS for years. Developer sentiment is low.
- presbyterian 11mo ago
  I've been a huge Mac fan for a decade or more, at least, and not only is Tahoe the least popular release I've seen, it's the first one where the majority of people I hear from dislike it. It's bad enough that I haven't updated still, I'm waiting a few point releases at least to see how they fix it up, and I'm trying out Linux distros to see what I'll start using if I have to move away.
  - Forgeties79 11mo ago
    Mac->Linux swapper here (back in April). I left after they screwed me on a hardware situation. Honestly I’ve really enjoyed the swap. But man I really miss having iMessages across my devices as well as the shared clipboard. By far the two things I missed the most. Everything else I’ve kind of moved on from and can’t even think of off the top of my head anymore
    - Max-Limelihood 11mo ago

abustamam 11mo ago

I grew up with windows. Used it until after college when I was gifted a MacBook pro for dev work. I used parallels to keep a windows box close by (I think I only ever used up to Vista), but then eventually I just went full Mac and got used to the interface and key bindings. It's a fine interface, not amazing, not terrible, but I can get around. And every job I've had basically required a Mac anyway. Years later, I built a gaming machine so obviously I needed Windows. Got Win10 and eventually upgraded to 11 and it's just so jarring how unusable it is. In older windows I could click on my computer to see all my drives and files. Now I have no idea where it is so I just click on the little folder icon at the bottom which opens I think my home directory, then I have to click on somewhere else to see my C and D drives. I can probably make a desktop shortcut or something but point being is that it's un intuitive. And powershell is not a great terminal, and I haven't found one for windows. SO, after learning that gaming works well on Linux, I recently switched to Ubuntu, and I haven't looked back. Gaming, AI workflows, everything I need works just perfectly, and if it doesn't I can easily customize things to work the way I want it to. I'm not treated as a criminal for installing software on my computer. It's awesome.

helterskelter 11mo ago

Same story here. My wife is not tech savvy at all but she likes Linux because it mostly just gets out of her way and the desktop doesn't really change drastically between updates. I haven't had to help her do anything on it in over a decade except get an old PC game up with Wine.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]