285
Is Linux As Good As We Think It Is?
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
285 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
48411 readers
887 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It depends on what you're using it for. Elaborate multi monitor setups? Starting a web server? Controlling a robot? A car's ECU?
Linux isn't a specific platform. Linux the kernel is a generic kernel that can be used and tuned for virtually any hardware. GNU/Linux the OS is also a generic OS that can be customized to work for variety of use cases. The most popular desktop Linux OSes are still very generic. Most of them aren't built to be power efficient on laptops for example. Yet we know Linux can be very power efficient on variety of purpose-built mobile hardware.
Windows on the other hand was built from the start to be a desktop OS. The desktop and later laptop use cases have always been primary. To the point of making other use cases more difficult. The same is true for macOS. So when you see them performing well in some desktop-related use cases where Linux might struggle a bit, it's no surprise. If enough of us wanted it to be better at that, we could make it happen. If enough of us wanted macOS or Windows to do something Apple or MS didn't, tough luck. So it's just a matter of priorities and resources.
This is the best description I've seen.
It gets old hearing the "Linux is better, Windows sucks" mantra.
They're different things with different use cases.
I despise Linux for a desktop, it's an awful experience, because it hasn't been developed/targeted for what I need to do, and I don't have the time to play fuck-fuck with distros to work something out - I have other shit to do.
Like build and manage Proxmox/TrueNAS boxes, which are... LINUX! Because this is where Linux shines, as purpose-built solutions.
Kinda, however Linux is always better in one regard - we can change it and it generally serves the needs of its users since its users build and change it. Windows and macOS on the other hand serve the needs of Microsoft's and Apple's major shareholders and only in part of their users to the degree they can get away with. The goal is always gaining and retaining market share while extracting the most value from the users - money, data, etc.
If enough of us wanted a sleek, uber smooth desktop that has all UI bases covered, we could totally do it. We just don't give enough shit and we're content with what it is. Case in point, I know multi-monitor support isn't amazing, so I buy a bigger monitor and use more windows. 🥹 Personally I've been content with the mainstream desktop Linux UX since 2012-14. You won't see me digging into features in GNOME or Wayland.