GNU/Linux is the future

At least this forum has a linux thread, and the forum users are moderately pro GNU/Linux, but sadly a lot of forums, even forums run by young tech savvy and probably relatively intelligent people, like Linus' forum, are still very hostile towards 21st Century computing, and have some kind of Amish Windoze religion thing going on.

An idea has been brought forward on this forum to build a dedicated TekSyndicate GNU/Linux distro. I personally think that's a great idea, as long as it's based on one of the major GNU/Linux distros so that it's easy to update and will support Steam and latest features without problems, and has a focus on privacy protection and security. I would use it. I will also keep my Windoze 7 install to play Windoze games of course, but I think it's clear that since a couple of years, there aren't many exciting revolutionary games coming out on Windoze anymore, and I really think it will take GNU/Linux to change that trend.

I think that conservatism and resistance to education is the only thing that's in the way for many users to enjoy the benefits of 21st Century computing. Pretty much anyone I've set up with GNU/Linux has immediately ceased to use Windoze except for games or Adobe software, and is very enthusiastic about GNU/Linux.

I would like to know other people's opinions on that, preferrably of other experienced GNU/Linux users, obviously people that have not experienced GNU/Linux can't form an opinion. Do you think conservatisme and resistance to education/evolution/improvement is the problem, or do you think there is another reason why a lot of users are not ready to step into 21st Century computing?

Windows is merely something people are used to, and when dealing with people, change is always difficult. When you''re used to something as simple as the start button in the bottom left hand corner and a desktop that you can do everything from, that's what you want to keep. It's why Windows 8 didn't do so well and there was so much hate for the OS as a whole, because it was different -whether for better or worse.


Linux, whicever distro you use, works differently in terms of opening programs or looking through your browser. Even if it's slight changes, such as the minimize and expand button being on the opposite side, it's something that takes getting used to and it's difficult to use for that little bit of time. Most users only open up IE and maybe save pictures and once in a while look through them, so many users don't even get to experience all the benefits that Linux can have. In fact, I remember even seeing an article -unfortunately I don't remember what it was or where it is- that explained how users are more interested in how the GUI works than everything in the background, especially security. 


So really the problem has much more to do with everything accepting change, which is much against human nature. It's why the "old people" are always out of touch with society, because they're typically stuck in whatever era they grew up in.

Windows is established, both in the professional and consumer worlds. Nvidia and AMD make their drivers for Windows, with terrible Linxu support. Adobe makes Windows software. Games are generally made for Windows. It's established, and at current rates, will remain established unless more people start using Linux on the desktop. As founder and chairman of the TekSyndicate/LoganOS project, if we could get everyone on the site to at least install a Linux distro, that would be a huge step forward in the progression of what you call "21st century computing." The best part about Linux is the efficiency, and simplicity. A lot of distros come with hardly anything installed that you don't need, which is why Linux distros are about 1 to 3GB. I use Linux for any real computing, but sadly have to use Windows for GPU Folding, gaming, and Photoshop. One day, Linux will become king, but until society collapses and only the programmers and Redditors remain, Windows will have to stay.

Microsoft Office got really popular mainly because it was compatible, at the time, with many other file extensions, which allowed anyone to use it and to work seamlessesly with other programs, making the gradual switch from other document editors quite simple. Linux is really good with working with other programs, for instance when you install linux and it doesn't completely shut out boot options for any other OS. I think once Wine, or any other virtual machine type program, becomes easier to install, more compatible, and just simpler to use, linux will be able to go mainstrain as dual booting won't be necessary since installing applications once used and still made specifically for windows, until the switch-over becomes much more prominent within the software developing world, will be usable within the Linux/GNU desktop by much lower-level techie users unable to cope with the time-consuming and sometimes confusing installation process of windows applications under linux.

Regarding a TekSyndicate Linux distro : I don't think that a distro is the thing the community shoudl create, but rather a TekSyndicate/RazeTheWorld theme for GNOME, KDE, XFCE and many other GUIs. But that is just what I think would be much nicer to have.

Imagine a world without Linux? It would literally be a train wreck. I personally think Linux has always been king. Just for the scalability, rawness and openness it reigns supreme.

Ive even put really simple distro's on tired old systems that would otherwise be doorstops. With the likes of PuppyLinux the machine works and runs just fine.

Now that Steam has come on board and gpu driver support is better Linux its only going to get better and I dare say in the next 12 months the consumer market share will have more Linux users than ever before.

Yes I agree, especially if Microsoft really means it with their plans to make Windows subscription-based, that will put off so many users. I also think Gabe Newell had no problem with windows except for the fact that Microsoft hasn't innovated in the core in twenty years, and it holds back the technical evolution in gaming.

Plus the amount of times Ive fixes pc's that have caked it by running a distro off a USB drive.

Plus there is the whole (cheap wifi netbook with no hdd + linux iso usb drive = perfect attacking platform pc) then just throw away the usb stick. Squeeky clean get away.

Surely GNU/Linux is the future, even NASA has switched now.

But the majority of normal computer users are not concerned about their OS as long as they get around it.

Take my best buddy for example:

I built him a fairly decent gaming rig [2500k, 680, 8gb, 128gb SSD / Caviar Black] but he does not give a shit about the interior of his PC and even less about the OS side as long as he can play his games on it as he is used to.

The mainproblem about GNU/Linux is simply that it involves change that many people either do not have the time to [e.g. my dad] or simply do not care for as long as everything does what they expect it to do.
Therefore it will not get mainstream as fast as it is supposed to inorder to take the lead.

And yes, I know mainstream is a bad word, but without a userbase that may look profitable there is not going to be a lot of driver support, program support and so on.

I do use Ubuntu on my 2nd PC [12.04, the newer versions especially due to the Amazon integration make me puke], and I do enjoy it, it's storing and backing up all my files, including all of my music / movies and so on. And the fact that it's close to impossible to get a virus on it makes it a fairly safe option for data storage / everyday browsing needs.

The very second I could use M$-Office [There is times where Libre just doesn't do the trick] / All my games / other needed applications [SPSS is one that even works on linux ^^] for university on GNU / Linux I'd jump the train instantly. The fact is, I can't. at least for now, since there is not much to be gained for say Adobe to port their CS to GNU/Linux as the demand is not high enough.

GNU/Linux in it's very core is a much more powerful OS than either Win or Mac [], which also is the reason that all but 1 [if I am not mistaken] supercomputers are running it.

But the time and effort you will have to put into your GNU/Linux distro in order to have everything running as you wish is simply putting off too many people. And even if it sounds weird, but many people do not even know of it's existence.

[quote]even forums run by young tech savvy and probably relatively intelligent people, like Linus' forum, are still very hostile towards 21st Century computing[/quote]

That's quite a statement, which I can tell you is rather unfounded.

Surely there is a lot of people "Me game on PC me happy" but they are found everywhere, this is the internet afterall, don't expect to much.

Even then, Linux still has its problems. Developers of Linux applications are usually just programmers that do that in their spare time. They seem to assume that everybody knows at least a little bit about writing config files and messing around with terminal. That's not a problem for savvy people like us. But for the normal person, that's way outside their area of knowledge. If Linux was more user-friendly, I think there would be more people interested in it. Granted, over the past few years user experience in Linux has improved dramatically. But I don't think it's still on par with Windows. 

Wow, when is the last time you have used GNU/Linux (except like 2 seconds ago in your car or your phone or tablet or parking meter or home automation or smart TV or PVR or media hub or printer)?

Windows has been sooo far behind the major Desktop Environments in GNU/Linux for the last 5 years or so. Gnome is even better and more modern than MacOS in terms of userfriendliness, and Windows has never even managed to catch up with MacOS for that.

Anyway, I do respect your opinion, but I'm quite sure not a lot of people will agree that the Windows 8 clickfest is more userfriendly than Gnome Shell or Cinnamon for instance. Windows is more like XFCE or Gnome2 or LXDE, and there at least you have the application search that works and the possibility to use multiple automated fully customisable toolbars or docky or cairo on the desktop. And the present Windows 8 desktop is like 5 minutes work to recreate with E17 or OpenBox, which are really slim DE's in GNU/Linux, for old or slow computers mainly, there are Android phones that handle the Windows 8 tile type desktop faster and more logically than Windows 8 on a PC.

And that's not all, if you plug a USB thumb drive or external USB HDD into a WIndows machine, you have to wait for a couple of minutes for Windows to find the driver and autostart, whereas with GNU/Linux, even on the oldest machine, that takes less than a second and it's mounted and available with an autostart menu with actually useful options. Or with all the cryptic registry hacking you have to perform on Windows to make it work like it should, then I definitely prefer a logical and clear CLI command in GNU/Linux or quickly editing a nicely organised and internally documented conf file with gedit. And then all the malware and malware prevention... I don't know, but I think there is a lot of misconception about how userfriendly Windows really is.

The CLI is also not necessary in GNU/Linux, it's part of the userfriendliness to have a logical and transparant command structure that every user CAN use if he/she's is so inclined, because after a while using GNU/Linux, part of the userfriendliness is that you don't have to use the GUI all the time, but can actually save time and eye movements and clicks by optionally doing something in terminal. With roll-down terminal windows like guake, that is also implemented in a really userfriendly way, but it's fully optional.

I think you are mixing up Linux and GNU/Linux. Android, as much as Richard Stallman would like to push, is not, in my opinion, GNU/Linux. It uses the Linux kernel, yes, and it's really user-friendly. But when talking about your typical GNU/Linux distro (I'm looking at you, Slackware), the user-friendiness is nothing compaired to something like Windows. 

Here is an example of my reasoning for the un-userfriendliness of *nix. Few months ago, I was setting up a netbook to use Fedora. To get the mouse to properly work, I had to edit a config file. There was no utility for setting the mouse to properly work (I was using KDE by the way). Another example. I was setting up Fedora on my desktop. I have three monitors. There is no utility for editing the layout of monitors, at least that I know of. You had to edit the config file. In Windows, you can do both of these things through Control Panel. By the way, I use Linux every day. I have only one non-Linux computer which is my workstation/gaming rig. 

I want to say that it is like you have to almost give up games and cast away the type of thinking that goes with windows and immerse yourself in linux for about a year before a certain eureka moment comes. When this happens you can then return to gaming and windows with a true objective perspective. It is then that you have been enlightened.


But when talking about your typical GNU/Linux distro (I'm looking at you, Slackware), the user-friendiness is nothing compaired to something like Windows.

Ubuntu is GNU/Linux, too and it is user-friendlier than windows. It's different so people are confused if it doesn't work like they expect it to work. But don't make that mistake to say it's not user-friendly.

To get the mouse to properly work, I had to edit a config file

The input for the X server doesn't require messing with config files for a few years now. Whatever you experienced is most probably a driver problem and you should scream at the manufacturer.

I have three monitors. There is no utility for editing the layout of monitors, at least that I know of.

xrandr, gnome-control-center, grandr, arandr, jupiter and disper. If you use catalsyt you have to use amdcccle.

In Windows, you can do both of these things through Control Panel

Wow, now I have to quote myself: "It's different so people are confused if it doesn't work like they expect it to work"

I doubt that you're objective, if you start with the intention to go back to your current setup.

Enlightened after one year linux. Yeah. Sure. I'm just going to ignore that you said that.

For me it was only about a year with slackware before i was compiling my own kernel and such, but hey I had a decade of DOS before that so maybe that helped a little with being comfortable with text files.

Thing is, it doesn't matter anymore, those defending closed source software and shunning open source are like those turning up at the battlefield after the battle is long over and the soldiers that fought the battle have gone home.


"GNU/Linux is the future"... These words already convinced me before I read anything else.