From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 23 Dec 2025, me@invalid.net posted some news:c6jmkkh4evvmbk8urdmd30g281999884em@4ax.com:

The author states only about 11 percent of the desktop market is now
running Linux one way or another.

My opinion: No normal Windows user is going to f'k around with the
mess that is Linux.

https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/22/what_linux_desktop_really_needs/ ?td=rt-3a

A partial of the page:

"Unix died because of endless incompatibilities between versions.
Linux succeeded on servers and everywhere else because it provided a
single open operating system that everyone could use. With the
desktop, though, we saw, and still see, endless incompatibilities.

Linus Torvalds also saw this. He's long thought that we have way too
many desktops. He's right. If someone goes to DistroWatch, they'll
find upwards of a hundred desktops. Who has time to figure out what's
best? I don't, and I cover this stuff for a living, and once ran a
site called Desktop Linux.

That's just the surface of the problem. Under that, you'll find
arguments over how to manage software packages and the library incompatibilities they must deal with. Distro builders constantly have
fits building and rebuilding programs to run on their Linux distros.
The traditional ways of delivering Linux desktop apps, such as DEB and
RPM package management systems for Debian and Red Hat Linux,
respectively, simply don't scale for the desktop."

Consistency counts.

It's the same parallel between Linux server / desktops as it is for
Windows Server / Desktops.

You really wouldn't want or need server capabilities on a desktop, but
it's nice to have the ability to add them if needed. At one time, Windows desktops had the capability to add some additional service, not any
longer.

Windows Workstation was a good compromise. I still have one running on a
VM.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 12/25/25 5:54 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:

On 23 Dec 2025, me@invalid.net posted some news:c6jmkkh4evvmbk8urdmd30g281999884em@4ax.com:

The author states only about 11 percent of the desktop market is now
running Linux one way or another.

My opinion: No normal Windows user is going to f'k around with the
mess that is Linux.

https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/22/what_linux_desktop_really_needs/
?td=rt-3a

A partial of the page:

"Unix died because of endless incompatibilities between versions.
Linux succeeded on servers and everywhere else because it provided a
single open operating system that everyone could use. With the
desktop, though, we saw, and still see, endless incompatibilities.

Linus Torvalds also saw this. He's long thought that we have way too
many desktops. He's right. If someone goes to DistroWatch, they'll
find upwards of a hundred desktops. Who has time to figure out what's
best? I don't, and I cover this stuff for a living, and once ran a
site called Desktop Linux.

That's just the surface of the problem. Under that, you'll find
arguments over how to manage software packages and the library
incompatibilities they must deal with. Distro builders constantly have
fits building and rebuilding programs to run on their Linux distros.
The traditional ways of delivering Linux desktop apps, such as DEB and
RPM package management systems for Debian and Red Hat Linux,
respectively, simply don't scale for the desktop."

Consistency counts.

It's the same parallel between Linux server / desktops as it is for
Windows Server / Desktops.

You really wouldn't want or need server capabilities on a desktop, but
it's nice to have the ability to add them if needed. At one time, Windows desktops had the capability to add some additional service, not any
longer.

Windows Workstation was a good compromise. I still have one running on a
VM.

You have to have a liberated mind to appreciate the variety in Linux -
to me, switching to another distro would be a very minor challenge. Differences, sure, but easy to comprehend and adapt to. If one's mind
doesn't operate as mine does, though, *any* distro can include work they
find challenging, to achieve results comparable to what is par for the
course in Windows. The egotists who use Unix/Linux systems feel smug
that they are so skilled, unlike the Windows lamers as they see them,
but people like myself simply feel freed from bondage to the drawbacks
of Windows. That I have to know arcane terminal procedures is a minor concern, to work toward a modern and robust system that is sleek and
bests Windows in nearly every respect. I'm not going to say it's for everyone, but there are reasons why I use it, even though I don't
dislike Windows, at some point one has to decide what's most important,
and for me, the better performance gained by using Linux trumps Windows' limited advantages.
--
Joel W. Crump
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2