cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ndlug.org/post/1064425
And Linux isn't minimal effort. It's an operating system that demands more of you than does the commercial offerings from Microsoft and Apple. Thus, it serves as a dojo for understanding computers better. With a sensei who keeps demanding you figure problems out on your own in order to learn and level up.
...
That's why I'd love to see more developers take another look at Linux. Such that they may develop better proficiency in the basic katas of the internet. Such that they aren't scared to connect a computer to the internet without the cover of a cloud.
Related: Omakub
Guy says this as if it's a good thing lol. That's the real reason people don't use Linux, nobody making Linux seems to care about user experience for normal people.
Yea I agree. Good UX is a lot of work, and I think FOSS projects rarely prioritize it. Even good documentation is hard to come by. When you write software for your own use case, it's easy to cut UX corners, because you don't need your hand held.
And good UX for a programmer might be completely different from good UX for someone that only knows how to use GUIs. E.g. NixOS has amazing UX for programmers, but the code-illiterate would be completely lost.
I believe that the solution is "progressive disclosure", and it requires a lot of effort. You basically need every interface to have both the "handholding GUI" and the underlying "poweruser config," and there needs to be a seamless transition between the two.
I actually think we could have an amazing Linux distro for both "normies" and powerusers if this type of UX were the primary focus of developers.
What you say describes my experience 10 to 15 years ago, not my experience today. Compare the settings dialog in KDE Plasma to the windows settings dialog for instance. Or should I say myriad of Windows settings dialogues.
It is a good thing for those of us who don't want bumper rails on our OS.
No it's not. Good user experience should also allow for extensive customization. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these things.
Linux does allow for extensive customization, way more than Wondows or Mac. They just don't hold your hand to show you how.
Yes but it has subpar user experience. But there is no reason you can't have both, that's what I'm saying.
Subpar how? That statement definitely doesn't reflect my own experience.
I've previously posted a few examples:
Two 4k external monitors through a docking station - Why is this seemingly effortless for Windows but basically impossible for Linux?
Is there a way to keep Linux responsive when at ~100% CPU usage?
I also regularly have my window manager crash when inserting my laptop into my docking station. Happens maybe 20% of the time. Sometimes even when it works the display scaling makes things blurry until I reset the scaling from 150% back to 100% and back again, then it's fine. Add to this a few annoyances with UI, but these are more forgivable.
There's all kinds of these small problems that compound to just make for a much worse experience. It doesn't just work but it needs to if it really wants to provide a viable alternative to normal people.
Keep in mind, I am not a "normal person" - I am a professional software engineer and I still find all this stuff super annoying.
I agree with your examples and it’s certainly true there are plenty of rough edges on Linux. Then again, how many examples are there for things that should “just work” and do on Linux but don’t on Windows? There’s enough that make me not use Windows at all, because it has a subpar user experience. I even used a Macbook for a few years, mainly for work, and there were too many small things that annoyed me about it, so it too had a subpar user experience.
Seems it’s mostly a matter of perspective which issues are more important to you.
Maybe some but much, much fewer. It shouldn't be surprising - Microsoft has hundreds if not thousands of people hired specifically for creating working UX and design. Linux just can't compete with that since it's mostly developers working on it and, again, developers unfortunately make for awful UX designers.
I don't think external monitors or a responsive UI is a matter of "perspective". These are things that should just work, always, for everyone.
What are the examples you are thinking of btw?
First example that came to mind was actually Mac users who struggle with external monitors/projectors and things like screen sharing too. I agree they’re things that are so basic they should just work. Reality is often different even on other OSes.
Of course if you have a Windows home and everything works and then you try Linux and it struggles with a piece of equipment, it’s easy to blame Linux. You wouldn’t even be wrong. But you are oblivious to someone else’s experience who uses Linux exclusively and everything works for them, how many of those things wouldn’t work or work well with Windows.
Personally I’m a developer, so I care a lot about integrating parts of my development stack. A lot of those things don’t “just work” on Windows, or even Mac, so I’m happy to stick with Linux instead.
I'm also a developer, but I'm also a user, depending on what I'm doing. And this is a very poor excuse for Linux having bad UX.
Linux shouldn't only be for developers, it should be for everyone.
Of course, I’m a user too, but I don’t think Linux’s UX is that bad. It may be bad in some areas, but it’s not bad across the board.
I also don’t think Linux is only for developers. It’s great for developers, but it’s also great for people with only basic needs of their computer, those that don’t need much more than a browser, an email client and maybe an office suite. The UX is totally adequate for them, as evidenced by ChromeOS.
I think where Linux lacks is mainly for the users in between, those who are not full developers or tinkerers, but do want to mess around and do so from a perspective of expectations of how things worked in the Windows world. And I won’t deny there’s a plethora of legitimate enterprise use cases for which there is no equivalent in Linux today. But those are not UX issues, those are mainly matters market support. Linux is not great there, maybe it never will be. Or if it does, it’ll take a long time.
There's like a thousand Linux distros. Having one be ready and easy to use, no hassle or deeper knowledge needed, won't stop the great many others that exist without bumper rails. Arch and Nix etc will still keep existing, so you can chill out, edgelord.