[SOLVED] What do Linux Desktop Users use Linux for?

[TonyMontana18]

What do Linux Desktop Users use Linux for: For Programming, For Developing, For Server, For Cloud Computing, For Studying or For Other Uses?

Like fixing cars in the garage and etc?

 

[Lutfij]

Most dyno tuners use Windows...either 7, 8, 8.1 or 10.As for your thread title question, Linux is used for a myriad of things and is down to personal preference actually. Much like how Mac's have their segment of users.

 

[Lafong]

A skilled Linux user can do nearly anything you can do with Windows.

Few have that skill level.

I'd guess Linux/Unix is still most popular in corporate environments, not at home. Dealing with servers rather than Grand Theft Auto, Tik-Tok, or making a chocolate cake.

Despite the fact that I first heard the phrase "Linux is about ready for the desktop" about 25 years ago.

Linux is very rarely anyone's first exposure to computing. Even less so now than 25 years ago. People get ingrained to one language (Windows or Apple) and get frustrated (understandably) trying to learn another.....unless they have a serious financial interest to do so.

 

[USAFRet]

What do Linux Desktop Users use Linux for: For Programming, For Developing, For Server, For Cloud Computing, For Studying or For Other Uses?

Like fixing cars in the garage and etc?

For the same things that Windows users do.

Anything that does not require a Windows platform can be done on Linux.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

It’s even becoming quite the gaming platform with steam and proton

 

[Grobe]

If "translated" into car language, I'd assume OP's question in a parallel car forum would sound something like:

What do Car owner use cars with manual transmission for? For Driving, For driving kids to school, For vacations, For getting out of the house, For Other Uses?

Like fixing computers in the workshop and etc?

There are some obvious advantages, like reduced maintenance/repair cost, slightly better milage. But in winter condition - Can have full control and if stucked in a small pot hole, are able to "swing" back and forth to get up from that hole - impossible with atomatic transmission 😎


[On topic]

There is a lot of reasons - a few I could throw up just now:

• Can run from anchient hardware (like computers from 2005) and still work fine.
• Free of use (not have to use money, but be nice guy to donate some money to your favorite distro)
• Very fun to explore many different windows environment (use Fedora KDE Plasma for the moment).
• If using torrent to downloading Linux ISO images, you don't get targeting from various layers trying to find your ID so they can sue.
• Less prone to malware (if using official channels to get software from)
• Does you OS age and getting close to it supported lifetime? No worries, can use an Arc-based distro like Manjaro that updates itself forever (assumes an active and maintained distro) or simply re-install from a ISO image for a newer version.

 

[Nine Layer Nige]

I run a media pc in the living room on Linux Mint 20. Fine for watching Youtube, browsing web etc.

 

[TonyMontana18]

Actually, They say that Linux is mostly used on servers, supercomputer and IoT Internet of things!

 

[hotaru.hino]

Actually, They say that Linux is mostly used on servers, supercomputer and IoT Internet of things!

There's several reasons for this:

• It's free
• It's easier to create a bespoke OS around the Linux kernel to fit a particular computer's needs.
• There's a bunch of software freely available, all of which can be compiled for the particular computer if needed (compiling for a particular computer can improve performance)
• Linux tends to be more friendly towards so-called headless systems, or computers that don't necessarily have a display or need a full blown GUI
• Commands and basic applications tend to be the same. The Jurassic Park meme of "This is UNIX, I know this!" actually has some weight to it. If you know your way around Linux via the command line and some basic applications (like nano for text editing), you basically can use any other Linux machine.

The biggest reasons I would argue why Linux hasn't taken off in the personal computer space are:

• Intel and Microsoft's aggressive marketing when computers were starting to become mainstream
• Apple's resurgence in the personal computer market
• Application management is a pain the butt
  • The primary method is through a package repository via the command line
  • A lot of distributions however are shipping with basically an "app store", which is simply a GUI front-end for the package repository
  • Applications are distributed by themselves, any dependencies they rely on has to be grabbed from the package repository. This also has the side effect that if the dependency updates, it may break the application that used it. Or worse, if you installed the application but the dependency no longer exists, you can't use it (although I haven't seen this case and I'm sure repositories take care not to remove stuff just because)
    • Dependency updates breaking things is solved by containers, but... these aren't user friendly to set up or manage.
  • Downloading applications from the web can be hit or miss. Sometimes they come in a package that you can install, other times they require you to compile the application. Both methods can be made as painless as possible, but nothing beats the way Apple or Microsoft does things.
  • And while there are some distribution methods to address the above (like Snap and Flatpak), they haven't really taken off and come with their own quirks.
  • Basically, app management in Linux is a whole 'nother level compared to Windows or macOS.
  • This isn't a problem with say servers or supercomputers because the number of applications they use and how they're updated are strictly controlled.

 

[USAFRet]

Commands and basic applications tend to be the same. The Jurassic Park meme of "This is UNIX, I know this!" actually has some weight to it. If you know your way around Linux via the command line and some basic applications (like nano for text editing), you basically can use any other Linux machine.

Actually, that is also mostly true in the Windows world.

Anyone semi competent could transfer directly from Win98 to Win 11, without a lot of brainache.
Notepad is Notepad
Excel is Excel
The same Control panel options are still there, just under a different clicky

All the current complaining about hating Win 10 or 11 is just refusing to look, and bitching because they can.

Transferring between the 3 major platforms, Linux/Windows/Apple, is more difficult.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Actually, that is also mostly true in the Windows world.

Anyone semi competent could transfer directly from Win98 to Win 11, without a lot of brainache.
Notepad is Notepad
Excel is Excel
The same Control panel options are still there, just under a different clicky

All the current complaining about hating Win 10 or 11 is just refusing to look, and bitching because they can.

Transferring between the 3 major platforms, Linux/Windows/Apple, is more difficult.

To a degree, I would agree with this, but Windows is not primarily command line driven and Microsoft has mucked up the UI/UX over major versions that there's still a learning curve go back between newer and older versions. Heck, I have to undo some muscle memory whenever I service my Windows 98 or XP machines because I'm so used to what Windows 10 has brought me. And even going from Windows 10 to 11 took some time to retrain myself and I'm still having some missteps.

But I've never really had this problem trying out a variety of distributions of Linux. I've used Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Zorin OS, CentOS 5/6/7, and RHEL 5/6/7. I can service them all with nary a hiccup sans the occasional misstep of what package manager command is.

 

[USAFRet]

To a degree, I would agree with this, but Windows is not primarily command line driven and Microsoft has mucked up the UI/UX over major versions that there's still a learning curve go back between newer and older versions. Heck, I have to undo some muscle memory whenever I service my Windows 98 or XP machines because I'm so used to what Windows 10 has brought me. And even going from Windows 10 to 11 took some time to retrain myself and I'm still having some missteps.

But I've never really had this problem trying out a variety of distributions of Linux. I've used Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Zorin OS, CentOS 5/6/7, and RHEL 5/6/7. I can service them all with nary a hiccup sans the occasional misstep of what package manager command is.

Right.
Command line, vs GUI muscle memory.
I have some of the same "oh wait" motions with 11.
But we can use a lot of the same commandline functions from Dos 2.0 in Win 11.

Dare I bring up the bitchfest that surrounded systemd?

 

[hotaru.hino]

Right.
Command line, vs GUI muscle memory.
I have some of the same "oh wait" motions with 11.
But we can use a lot of the same commandline functions from Dos 2.0 in Win 11.

Dare I bring up the bitchfest that surrounded systemd?

While true, at the end of the day, I do not consider this the same advantage as I described, as in retrospect, the advantage is greater. Learning the primary interface of a Linux based OS, which I say is the command line, not only allows you to use other distributions of Linux, but practically any OS that is UNIX or UNIX-like, which for all practical purposes is any non-Windows OS in major use. I was able to even play around in macOS in its terminal just fine because macOS is a UNIX OS.

Windows cmd seems to exist only to provide backwards compatibility with BAT style scripts. Heck a basic text editor doesn't seem to exist anymore on cmd. Plus Microsoft seems to want people to use PowerShell or Terminal, which doesn't seem to know what it wants to be.

 

[TonyMontana18]

There's several reasons for this:

• It's free
• It's easier to create a bespoke OS around the Linux kernel to fit a particular computer's needs.
• There's a bunch of software freely available, all of which can be compiled for the particular computer if needed (compiling for a particular computer can improve performance)
• Linux tends to be more friendly towards so-called headless systems, or computers that don't necessarily have a display or need a full blown GUI
• Commands and basic applications tend to be the same. The Jurassic Park meme of "This is UNIX, I know this!" actually has some weight to it. If you know your way around Linux via the command line and some basic applications (like nano for text editing), you basically can use any other Linux machine.

The biggest reasons I would argue why Linux hasn't taken off in the personal computer space are:

• Intel and Microsoft's aggressive marketing when computers were starting to become mainstream
• Apple's resurgence in the personal computer market
• Application management is a pain the butt
  • The primary method is through a package repository via the command line
  • A lot of distributions however are shipping with basically an "app store", which is simply a GUI front-end for the package repository
  • Applications are distributed by themselves, any dependencies they rely on has to be grabbed from the package repository. This also has the side effect that if the dependency updates, it may break the application that used it. Or worse, if you installed the application but the dependency no longer exists, you can't use it (although I haven't seen this case and I'm sure repositories take care not to remove stuff just because)
    • Dependency updates breaking things is solved by containers, but... these aren't user friendly to set up or manage.
  • Downloading applications from the web can be hit or miss. Sometimes they come in a package that you can install, other times they require you to compile the application. Both methods can be made as painless as possible, but nothing beats the way Apple or Microsoft does things.
  • And while there are some distribution methods to address the above (like Snap and Flatpak), they haven't really taken off and come with their own quirks.
  • Basically, app management in Linux is a whole 'nother level compared to Windows or macOS.
  • This isn't a problem with say servers or supercomputers because the number of applications they use and how they're updated are strictly controlled.

And windows is made for gaming while Linux not a lot and made for other uses like autocad, video editing etc on personal level but on professional level Linux is used more like hac king, programming, web servers etc

 

[TonyMontana18]

True, in Ubuntu u have Ubuntu software and snap store, but in Linux mint it's name softwares only and commands in Ubuntu are sudo apt install but in Linux mint it's sudo get install if I'm not mistaken!

Right.
Command line, vs GUI muscle memory.
I have some of the same "oh wait" motions with 11.
But we can use a lot of the same commandline functions from Dos 2.0 in Win 11.

Dare I bring up the bitchfest that surrounded systemd?

 

[TonyMontana18]

I s

While true, at the end of the day, I do not consider this the same advantage as I described, as in retrospect, the advantage is greater. Learning the primary interface of a Linux based OS, which I say is the command line, not only allows you to use other distributions of Linux, but practically any OS that is UNIX or UNIX-like, which for all practical purposes is any non-Windows OS in major use. I was able to even play around in macOS in its terminal just fine because macOS is a UNIX OS.

Windows cmd seems to exist only to provide backwards compatibility with BAT style scripts. Heck a basic text editor doesn't seem to exist anymore on cmd. Plus Microsoft seems to want people to use PowerShell or Terminal, which doesn't seem to know what it wants to be.

Yh, I see MacOS chrome os and Linux are better than windows although they are less used than windows and made for certain devices like MacOS for macs only chrome os made for Chromebook only and Linux for all devices and android too is better than windows and it's used more than windows made for smartphones and tablets only! 😉

 

[Cactusgal]

We're currently using Linux Mint 19.3. I like and use Linux for all the reasons already stated here plus a few more:
It's endlessly customizable
It comes with a suite of software already installed and ready to go plus a lot more through the Software Manager which also takes care of any needed dependencies
It runs from a flash drive and with Casper you can save any changes or additions you make
Unlike Windows it doesn't have a registry to bloat and slow things down over time. I've known people to buy a new laptop because of the slowness when all it needed was a fresh new Windows install
With Wine and PlayOn Linux I have fun getting some Windows software to work
It's Windows friendly, recognizing a Windows partition and offering to partition and install alongside and adds Windows to it's boot menu

I started dabbling with Ubuntu 3.0, a few years later I installed Ubuntu on an old computer after I built a new one. moved to Linux Mint when Ubuntu adopted the Unity desktop and for the last few years use it exclusively. My desktop is dual boot with Windows but I rarely use it. My no-tech husband finds Linux less problematic as he never knew what to do when Windows popped up an update notice then the firewall needed permission. He just wants to turn it on, get his emails, write and surf the web.