←back to thread

433 points Sporktacular | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
015a ◴[] No.36995730[source]
> But before you declare this a triumphant moment for desktop Linux, it's important to note that some of these Linux users are not, in fact, using Steam on a desktop. The Linux version "SteamOS Holo" 64-bit is the most popular reported, at just over 42 percent of the Linux slice of pie. That indicates that a huge portion of these Linux users are actually playing on Valve's Steam Deck portable, which runs Linux.

There's such a deep seeded, systemic bias against linux that it actually can never win, to any degree or magnitude, because the moment it starts winning we just move the goal-posts for the flimsiest of reasons to ensure it can't quite claim that victory.

Linux is obviously and clearly the most popular operating system kernel on the planet. Oh, no, that's no good a measure, servers are messy, let's refine it to most popular consumer operating system kernel? Oh... it, could also reasonably claim that title? No no, no Android, that doesn't count. Nope, No Chrome OS either, you can't have that, that's, well, that is linux, but its not. Just nice, pure, desktop linux, yes, perfect, arch linux, kde desktop, that'll never trend up and thus is the perfect new-new definition of desktop linu--wait hold up, I'm getting word this is, not possible, its actually SteamOS? Nope, kill it, that's not desktop linux either, kill it.

replies(39): >>36995745 #>>36995754 #>>36995802 #>>36995816 #>>36996131 #>>36996180 #>>36996519 #>>36996545 #>>36996734 #>>36996737 #>>36996821 #>>36996923 #>>36997130 #>>36997165 #>>36997388 #>>36997472 #>>36997547 #>>36997841 #>>36998245 #>>36998348 #>>36998488 #>>36998585 #>>36998591 #>>36998706 #>>36998886 #>>36999237 #>>36999755 #>>36999906 #>>36999939 #>>37000079 #>>37000120 #>>37000848 #>>37001352 #>>37001723 #>>37001744 #>>37002817 #>>37003649 #>>37007275 #>>37037781 #
handmadeta ◴[] No.36996737[source]
I am not sure it's a matter of bias.

Instead, I think it's that "Linux" is an overloaded term. One sense is that someone downloads and installs a "Linux" distro because they actually want to use "GNU+Linux" (wink). The other sense, what you are aluding, to is that linux is foundational to most things IT. If I subscribe to DSL the provider is probably going to send me a modem that runs linux. But that doesn't mean I chose linux. I just wanted DSL. Same for Android. Most people that use Android didn't choose a linux-based mobile operating system. They want Android or are just using whats one the phone they wanted. And indeed, I don't think many "GNU+Linux" people would tolerate the specific essense of Android in their distros.

Now, SteamOS might be the bridge between these two worlds. On the one hand, Steam Deck users also didn't chose Linux. But then, the resources that Valve can spend on enabling gaming on Linux because of the success of Steam Deck means that many more people, like me, can finally consider choosing Linux.

replies(5): >>36996857 #>>36997329 #>>36997771 #>>36999704 #>>36999963 #
arghwhat ◴[] No.36997329[source]
At the same time, the majority of those running Windows have the same relationship to it as you have with Linux on your DSL modem - "It's what the computer I bought comes with" - and yet we are not discounting those Windows users. Same goes for macOS, especially now where Asahi Linux is the only and yet incomplete alternative.

In some comparisons it makes sense to remove DSL modems from the equation and focusing on some more "computer-like" subset of device (otherwise no OS would ever do better than "several orders of magnitude fewer deployments than Linux"), but discounting every device where you did not actively pick the OS would make for an extremely biased comparison.

Plus, we don't care about such distinctions outside comparisons. SteamOS have already driven significant improvements for regular desktop users. Same goes for Tizen, Android and ChromeOS. Even wonky DSL firmwares have positive effects for the rest of us.

> GNU+Linux

no.

replies(3): >>36997735 #>>37000874 #>>37004799 #
Draiken ◴[] No.36997735[source]
Exactly. And MacBook users don't choose MacOS either.

For many non tech savvy users if you give them a Linux laptop with any modern DE, they can't tell the difference.

But it seems these filters are almost always cherry picked against Linux for some reason I sincerely don't know.

replies(5): >>36998213 #>>36998714 #>>36998850 #>>36999825 #>>37047312 #
nullindividual ◴[] No.36998850[source]
> Exactly. And MacBook users don't choose MacOS either.

I'm not sure what would make you an authoritative source on why people by Macs or where you're sourcing your thoroughly researched data, but I can tell you I purchased an MBA to run macOS and the software that runs on macOS. Or like the Intel N100 mini PC I purchased explicitly to run proxmox + OPNSense. Or like my Windows laptop to have a mobile lab.

I pick the machine based on the software I want to run. I'm sure we can find one, perhaps if we stretch it, two other people on HN who also purchase machines based off of the OS/software they need to run.

replies(2): >>36999296 #>>36999982 #
arghwhat ◴[] No.36999296[source]
Many on HN might be intimately familiar with macOS internals, but we are not in any way or form the average users. Running OPNSense on Proxmox definitely sets the "outlier" sticky bit.

Most users do not watch WWDC and do not know what OS release notes are. They don't know what the boundary between their web browser and their OS is, and macOS just becomes "the thing that nags them to update it" - a nag that users unfortunately still ignore, as evident by my recent confrontation with Big Sur machines.

replies(3): >>36999751 #>>37000513 #>>37009495 #
nullindividual ◴[] No.36999751[source]
Oh I completely agree with you that folks on HN are likely to be of a particular mindset when it comes to technology purchases.

However, that doesn't mean that every non-HN user out there buys the aluminum-shell-in-the-vague-shape-of-a-laptop and doesn't make a conscious choice.

My point still stands. The GP doesn't have the data to back up the assertion.

replies(1): >>37000547 #
1. arghwhat ◴[] No.37000547[source]
There is also no data to back up the opposite assertion. It would be rather surprising to see comments on HN based on hard statistical data - an implicit "IMO" prefix makes sense to apply in most human discussions.

> That does not mean that every non-HN user...

Not every - but I do believe it is still the majority. There are a lot of people out there, and the knowledge required to make the aforementioned OS choice is niche.

This is not implying stupidity, just that there are many trades and interests out there, and subscribing to ours specifically is not a given.

replies(1): >>37000899 #
2. nullindividual ◴[] No.37000899[source]
> There is also no data to back up the opposite assertion.

Which is why I made no assertion with a percentage.

> but I do believe it is still the majority

What makes you believe that? Thousands of data points? Hundreds? Tens? The handful of people around you? Certainly not statistics.

replies(1): >>37002287 #
3. arghwhat ◴[] No.37002287[source]
You are indeed making the opposite assertion by implying the statement is false, hypocritically with no information to back it up. By your standards, your counter is entirely invalid. "I do not know" is how you avoid making an assertion.

Ridiculous standards aside, I find it an extremely reasonable to assert that given more than 7 billion people across vast areas, interests, ideologies and jobs, and given the vast hi.an knowledge, expertise and culture, that any particular interest or knowledge is only shared by a small subset.

replies(1): >>37004735 #
4. kelnos ◴[] No.37004735{3}[source]
> You are indeed making the opposite assertion by implying the statement is false

That's not at all what they said. All they're saying -- correctly -- is that you are asserting some sort of magnitude ("majority") without any data to back it up.

I would guess, though, from my personal experience, that you are probably right that a majority of people just get whatever laptop with whatever OS they're used to because that's what their parents/school/employer gave them to use, and when it's time for a new machine, they just get whatever they had before. But I don't think this is a very large majority.

> I find it an extremely reasonable to assert that given more than 7 billion people [...] that any particular interest or knowledge is only shared by a small subset.

Probably true, but also remember that OS choice isn't always driven by interest. A macOS user may get frustrated with the state of gaming on the Mac, and decide to switch to Windows. Or a Windows user might really want or need to use an application only available on macOS (though I expect this sort of thing doesn't happen as often anymore, since more and more of people's computer use ends up being through a web browser). A Windows user might also buy an iPhone or iPad and get into the Apple ecosystem enough that they decide to switch to macOS.

Certainly some people who do switch OSes don't do so because they've made an independent choice; they do so because they switch employers, and something else is the only thing available, or a friend evangelizes another OS to them to the point they want to give it a try, and end up liking it.

Regardless, many people these days don't even have a laptop or desktop computer, and do all their computing on their phone or tablet. I think that 7 billion number gets a lot smaller when you consider that. (Also, as an aside, the current world population is estimated to be a bit over 8 billion now, not 7.)

replies(1): >>37010177 #
5. arghwhat ◴[] No.37010177{4}[source]
The problem with making unreasonable demands for data in response to casual discussions is that it is usually done when the person strongly disagrees with the statement. For that reason, it is implicitly a counter argument, and a hypocritical one: "Your opinion differs from mine, so you must provide data to back up yours!". None of the available options can be considered default, so any outcome is equally "grand" and subject to same requirements. Opposing without having a standpoint could happen in a peer review for a paper, but that is not what this is.

Your response is more reasonable, and is also more out in the open about the alternate belief (of course equally without data). Nothing wrong with disagreeing - only about making up unbalanced burdens of proof in casual discussions.