←back to thread

433 points Sporktacular | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | 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 #
wtetzner ◴[] No.37000513[source]
> a nag that users unfortunately still ignore

For good reason. Running those updates requires restarting the computer, which in turn means you have to get your working state setup again after each update. People use computers to get things done, and running updates often has the opposite effect.

replies(2): >>37001124 #>>37003652 #
1. ndriscoll ◴[] No.37001124[source]
That and updates are going to be the time where computers stop working. If you don't change anything, it will generally continue to work fine for years. My experience with MacOS at work was that I could expect to spend at least a day fixing whatever broke after each major OS version update, so naturally I'd put off doing it for as long as possible.

Even if things continue to work, updates may come with UI changes that disrupt the user's workflow (and the trend tends to be to remove or hide functionality and make things less useful/information dense as time goes by). Unless there's something you specifically want, modern software updates tend to be high risk low reward from the user's perspective.

Incidentally this is why I prefer desktop Linux. With the exception of Firefox turning into Chrome over the years, FOSS software tends to be remarkably stable. My home computer feels like it hasn't changed at all in almost a decade. I never have to fiddle with it.