Skip Navigation
148 comments
  • The problem is that the road between creating a piece of software that does something well, and then creating simplification layers on top of it is typically much longer than just "edit a config file" and "here's a readme".

    You need extra documentation, config gating and workflow, warnings, UI/UX work etc.

    I know there are Linux elitists but kind of expecting that much extra work for what is still at it's core mostly volunteer software seems like it's own form of elitism.

    • The thing is, simple can mean two things, and they are quite often at odds with each other.

      It can mean simple to understand, or simple to use.

      For example, a piece of software that's just a binary, a config file and a man page describing the config file and the software's behavior is generally quite easy to understand. Like, you can fit the idea of the program entirely into your mind and "comprehend" it, though it may not be easy to use for a novice.

      By contrast, a piece of software that contains additional layers for easy of use, like a GUI to edit options, may be simple to use, but not necessarily simple to understand. The additional layers add more complexity that does not contribute to core functionality of the program, it can become unclear what gets changed where when you click on buttons, the config file is likely not documented, human readable or editable, or it may even be a completely opaque configuration database (the registry), ... So making the software more simple to use, often makes it harder to comprehend.

      I, and I think many other nerds, like software that is simple in the "comprehensible" sense, we want to be able to wrap our head around it completely and we don't mind putting in a little bit of effort to achieve that comprehension, whereas other people prefer to hit the ground running.

    • Absolutely agreed, I find it extremely telling that most people who say that have never personally contributed nor donated. Its ok to have expectations but its not ok to make demands from volunteers, thats why so many devs get burnt out and leave.

  • luckily people seem to be becoming better with this.

    linux is also becoming better at being user friendly.

  • My only beef with this lately has been valutwarden.

    like look, I get it, http is shit, but I'm on a local network and it isn't shared or even published to the greater internet in any way... can't I NO, YOU WILL USE DNS CERTS PER ARTICLE 1.2 OF THE INSTALLATION GUIDE AND YOU WILL SET UP A REVERSE PROXY WITH CLOUDFLARE...

    ughhhh

  • Heres the thing, it strongly depends what you mean by "simplification" and tbh im not sure that would be good for Linux. Im all in favor of adding accessibility features and making desktops more complete but sometimes complexity or being different is good. I love tiling for example, I love how comsic implemets tiling. However tiling isnt naturally intuitive to Windows users, does that mean we need to abandon it in favor of "simplification"? Do we need to abandon the system of distro maintained repos and package managers because "its too complicated"?

    I suppose my point is that we should make Linux more accessible by lowering the skill floor to use it but it should not and does not require lowering the skill ceiling for advanced users like me. I love the focus on TUI software and I love the terminal (that doesn't mean GUI software should get less love, it means I would rather not see TUI packages sacrificed).

    Furthermore I cannot speak for anyone but myself but I personally try to help people in matrix/discord chats and places like this. However sometimes I will come across someone whos use case doesn't fit Linux. Maybe they need a specific software, maybe they're using niche proprietary hardware that they need, but I personally refuse to suggest Linux to someone if it wont be good for them. If someone tells me "hey I use Linux but I need some software like adobe" I would suggest they reinstall Windows. In addition before I reccomend Linux to someone I tell them that Linux isnt Windows, I make it clear there are downsides that need to be taken with the upsides and sometimes things wont work exactly the same.

    TLDR: Im all for people using Linux, however we shouldn't lie to ourselves and others

  • It's a big abstract to understand, are you trying to say that there are Linux enthusiasts that protest GUIs being made simple and intuitive, and that if they succeed, would-be Linux users will go back to Windows, which is more intuitive?

    Maybe for KDE, but just introduce new users to GNOME, that's perfectly intuitive and even looks great!

  • What do you mean you don't like reading documentation to use the basic functions of my OS?

    Why would anyone ever want to use a UI or a mouse?

  • No more shall man have wings to bear him to paradise
    Henceforth he shall walk

  • You're good these days until you want to do anything nonstandard.

    By use case, the limited amount of things my parents do with their Future Shop still existed era Laptops got them comfortable with Fedora KDE pretty quickly.

    Coming to a Linux distro as a Windows power user? I had skill issues.

148 comments