I don't know anything about Linux and the idea of installing it frightens me. Where do I start?
I don't know anything about Linux and the idea of installing it frightens me. Where do I start?
I bought a laptop yesterday, it came pre-installed with Windows 11. I hate win 11 so I switched it down to Windows 10, but then started considering using Linux for total control over the laptop, but here's the thing: I keep seeing memes about how complicated or fucky wucky Linux is to install and run. I love the idea of open source software and an operating system without any of the bullshit that comes with Windows, but most of the open source stuff I have is on my android and fairly easy to install. Installing and using Linux just feels like it'll be a whole different beast that'll eat up most of my time and I'm kind of intimidated by it.
TL;DR Linux scawy, how does a barely computer literate scrub like me who's used nothing but windows since the dawn of their life get started with Linux?
You're viewing a single thread.
Dont install it, yet. Make a bootable usb stick with balena etcher and put a linux distro on it (I highly recommend mint, pop_os or ubuntu (standard version) as ISO on it.
Ubuntu is very controversial in the more advanced sphere but I learned on it and its great for beginners.
If you want to go a little bit over the top download ventoy and put it on the usb instead. You can then put as many ISOs on there as you can fit and just select one of them at boot.
The most important part for beginners is the desktop environment anyway so gnome should be fine. If you have tried it for more than an hour and still feel like this could be fun, click install and give it a go.
You could also dual boot but windows might fuck you over since they‘re not great neighbors as an OS.
Feel free to ask if you want to know more. Good luck.
Try out [distro based on Ubuntu], [distro based on Ubuntu], or Ubuntu? These are largely on in the same. Either test drive something with a non-.deb base & a different package manager, or suggest what a lot of folks really notice when discussing the feel which is the alternative DEs (desktop environments) on offer. Fedora & other big names usually offer ISO varieties with the major DEs. I think finding a DE is a better starting point since most DEs will be offered by most distros.
No. Thats exactly the reason why folks get frustrated with linux. Because folks cant fathom how much handholding a user needs in the beginning.
apt and systemd based distro is great for beginners, so is gnome. They‘re very popular and a lot of folks know how to troubleshoot if possible.
I suggest you make your own suggestions instead of trying to „correct“ others‘.
If the person is supposed to test out a distro, the stuff they will remark on is the default apps & layout of their DE first & foremost that it’s disingenuous to the larger landscape to make 67% of your recommendations are GNOME & all are the same base. GNOME’s UX sucks. Others might like it, but a lot like me probably won’t so why not include an option with KDE Plasma, Cinnamon (listed), XFCE, & maybe a tiling manager if you know the target audience well enough for your short list is a better take. Who new to Linux is going to be able to tell you the difference between Pop_OS & Ubuntu? …This is why your list of 3 is a bad suggestion--too much of the same that leads a new user into thinking there isn’t a world of possibilities.
The frustrating part at the beginning is all the under-the-hood stuff that isn’t visual like the DE. I never suggested talking about systemd, musl, pipewire, Wayland/X11, GNU coreutils, or any of that other stuff that is harder to understand.
You really have issues mate. I couldnt give a damn if you think that gnome‘s ux is bad. Thats your opinion and neither did I ask you for it nor is it helpful to others. But good luck with that attitude.
If you show someone GNOME & they don’t like it, then show them another GNOME ISO they still aren’t going to like it & think that is what Linux is as a first impression & decide it’s not for them. Variety & finding something that fits you is an important appeal & likely to create a convert if the ‘vibe’ of their new OS is right.
Sorry you think all suggestions are some antagonistic shot at you personally rather than trying to reach the common goal of getting more folks to try & convert to Linux. But good luck with that attitude of calling folks unhelpful, dismissing suggestions & concerns for something you might be overlooking.
Ubuntu is very controversial in the more advanced sphere
I would argue only turbonerds really complain about it. But in my experience, for professionals who just need to get things done it works perfectly fine 99% of the time. Same for Windows or OSX to be honest.
Of course there's going to be those one or two guys from the vocal minority with some esoteric hardware that didn't work chiming in shortly I'm sure.
I think its an outdated recommendation. They keep making weird choices and one of only two friends that was willing to try Linux went and tried Ubuntu without my input and decided to go back to windows for a bunch of mostly mundane reasons that could have either been configured away or been preempted by using a different distro. The other guy will be back but on bazzite after trying my steam deck he only left for shitty rootkit anticheat games that he's now sick of. He started on one of the arch easy install methods and was already a power user on both windows and Mac.
In fact I used ubuntu until version 23.10 iirc so no, its not an outdated recommendation. Actually I still use it on my servers because it doesnt need a desktop there and I‘m not changing OSs unless I have to. 22.04 is still perfectly fine on there.
The issue with power users (I‘m an admin myself) is that we‘re used to being in control and some new OS feels weird as we might get stuck for a bit. Not everyone likes to deal with that.
Still valid opinion I think. Have a good one.
Every server I've encountered in my professional life runs either some kind of enterprise™ Linux like Red Hat (licensed, expensive ones), Ubuntu, or Debian, or some extremely customised Linux that's unusable for any purpose other than whatever it was built for. Dev machines run Ubuntu, or maybe Fedora or some enterprise™ Linux.
I've heard from a lot of startups using nixOS and your Arch flavour of the week, but I'm pretty sure that's only used because all four people in the company are Linux turbo nerds who have managed to agree on one specific obscure Linux distro.
Business people do complain about Ubuntu, though. They don't like automatic updates (because their weird proprietary software only works with the specific versions they picked and they can't be bothered to actuslly fix their code) so snaps are a threat. Ubuntu Pro expanding threatens their "use software someone else pays maintenance tax for without any bill" business plan. See also: "I like Debian but I dislike the way they patch things and how hard it is to install proprietary blobs onto it".
They want their free software to be maintained for free not because they care about software freedom, but because they're cheap, and Canonical and IBM starting to charge businesses for the software development they do threatens that business model.
I'm using Nix and it's basically the same as every other Linux distro except settings and packages are managed slightly differently. It's the DE that really makes a difference for people I think.
Conceptually, Nix is just the next evolution of tools like Ansible, and tangentially related to projects like Silverblue, but in practice, it's only used by enthusiasts. And, of course, you can use Nix outside of NixOS.
Unless there's a tool I don't know about, there's no equivalent for Discover or Gnome Software for NixOS. Because that's the class of boring people that make up the silent majority: the people who don't know how to, or don't want to edit configuration files. This was how Valve made Linux on a console a success, and it's why Ubuntu is still popular despite their experiments causing them to be decried by the community over and over again.
I wouldn't even say boring. They just want to get stuff done lmao
I meant boring to !linux@lemmy.ml :)
Boring is good when it comes to operating systems, cars, and other utilities, unless you like maintaining that stuff as a hobby!
So true
In fact, I dont use ubuntu on my desktop anymore because of their snap craze. I also think talking down to people shows lack of character btw. Have a good one anyway.
There are ways to remove snap and prevent it from (even accidentally) being installed again, that's what I do. https://www.baeldung.com/linux/snap-remove-disable
But you can tell me how you think I was talking down to people? I'd like to know so I can correct my behavior if necessary.
Was it the word turbonerd? Sure not everyone may agree with that, it was said jokingly and I really just meant non-professional users who are passionate about Linux, wasn't trying to make fun of anyone.
I highly appreciate you asking for feedback and acknowledge a possible opportunity for growth. Very rare, doubly so on the internet imo.
The intention you use something with - sadly - does not communicate over written text well. If you use common derogatory language in a „funny“ way doesnt change that it is derogatory. Think calling a black person the n word or a woman the b word but „meaning it funny“.
The word turbo nerd is exceptionally derogatory and akin to making fun of disabled people.
screaming at themselves or cursing can be a sign of tourette, the IT world has a very high rate of autistic people and hearing them scream can be a sign of a meltdown. Thats not something to make fun about.
In any case it never is your business to make fun of someone except the person gives consent (ie is a friend who is cool with being treated that way or does the same with you). Taking away people‘s agency that way is indeed what can lead to horrible outcomes. Just dont do it. You can be funny in a different way.
The word turbo nerd is exceptionally derogatory and akin to making fun of disabled people.
This is really not true in any way, and he never mentioned screaming. It is good that he's being conscious here, and I don't want to assume anything about your personal experiences, but I felt like I should offer my perspective because I feel that yours is not representative of the common view.
Listen mate, please read before you assume. I cited a source because thats what you do when you claim stuff so I did.
Using degrading language isnt okay and neither is trying to dismiss someone explaining it because its „not representative of the common view“. I never said it was.
I was explaining how I made the conclusion. No reason for you to jump to their defence. I was explaining. Have a good one.
Listen mate, please read before you assume.
?
Speaking of assuming, you assumed he was using the Urban Dictionary definition. What I was trying to say is that he likely didn't mean it in that manner. It's good to be conscious that the UD definition exists, but it seemed like you were saying he was intentionally using that definition.
Hope your day is going well too.
Exactly. Just that I didnt assume that he meant anything. I‘m not going off of any ideas of others‘ minds as I cant know what goes on in there. I‘m talking about a common interpretation which people will follow if no other context is provided.
If someone is leaving windows for privacy reasons, it doesn't make sense to go to Ubuntu.
Can you list some reasons why you think this is true?
I admit, everything I know about Ubuntu is heresay as I don't use it myself. But I was under the impression that there was a lot of telemetry that they send back, and ads/bloatware they ship with to subsidize their development.
everything I know about Ubuntu is heresay
Then why did you act like you knew what you were talking about?
You have better things to do, why are you asking me that?
I don't. I ask because confidently wrong people are one of the biggest reasons why the internet sucks IMO, and I want to understand why people do it.
I don't.
Oof, fair enough.
The only part I think I was wrong about was the level of consent requested from the user. I was under the impression that they were kinda like Firefox, opting the user into telemetry sharing by default, making the refusal of data sharing more obtuse or hidden than it should be. But my impression that ubuntu still serves ads and still feels like someone else letting you use their system sounds accurate.
It sounds like you use Ubuntu, so you could probably let me know where I'm wrong.
There is a lot of Ubuntu hate and it is easy to go with that and repeat.
-
- The Amazon button on the Ubuntu desktop (I believe it was not in the Ubuntu flavors) was removed after criticism.
- Ads in the terminal. I've only seen those when using ssh to a server. Ads like the k8 server options of Ubuntu. No flashy jumpy colorful big ads but just small text.
Telling people that there is no difference between installing Ubuntu and Windows is kind of cruel imho. A fresh Ubuntu installation allows the new Linux user to learn Linux and after some time they can decide to go for Arch Linux, Debian (The install is not that easy as with Ubuntu for a beginner Linux user), MX Linux or whatever they prefer.
Oh yeah, totally agree it's not the same as windows. I said if their concern about windows was privacy, Ubuntu won't feel different. It'll feel like they're letting you use their PC. I still get that sense from all descriptions I hear. I forgot about the ads in the terminal, that's wild.
-
Ubuntu is a great gateway distro to Linux. It ressemble Windows a lot, stable and straight forward to install and use.
So a new user is not too lost when switching over.
And, yeah, privacy is not that great, but having installed windows 11 on a new PC, Ubuntu is a lot better than windows
Why? Because it asks the user if they would like to send feedback to Canonical during setup? Because that's the only privacy issue I can remember re: Canonical, after their weird Amazon lens was quickly killed off.
Why is asking for feedback a bad thing? IMO it's better than just being on by default, and still gives the developers an opportunity to at least get SOME useful feedback instead of all the people that screech about how telemetry should be banned entirely. I would bet money none of those people are professional developers.
I don't think it's bad to ask; even Debian asks you for feedback. Ubuntu, Debian, and a bunch of other distros are doing the right thing by making this feedback opt-in, but for some people even that is already too much.
I have no idea what supposed privacy issues Ubuntu has these days. Snap is certainly A Controversial Thing, but it's been years since they made a deal with Amazon.
Why is asking for feedback a bad thing? IMO it’s better than just being on by default, and still gives the developers an opportunity to at least get SOME useful feedback instead of all the people that screech about how telemetry should be banned entirely. I would bet money none of those people are professional developers.
Indeed. Programmers really love feedback to improve their applications. I bet that everyone who installs apps for iOS or Android from the Google Play Store will have lots of apps that have crash-a-lytics, or whatever it is called, installed.