The greatest strike against linux as mainstream OS

linux is made by its users, there's naturally few linux devs who make things with a focus on new/laymen users

windows/osx are made by people who are paid to make it suitable for new/laymen users

linux wouldn't exist at all if not for its technically-minded users, calling this a negative doesn't really make sense

>>56561846
Developers use Linux for its developer friendliness: a UNIX embodiment and native package manager, something Windows and MacOS don't offer.

Now making the OS user friendly and asking money for it like Apple does or shoving ads down users throats like Microsoft does, isn't as lucrative on Linux beside anti-features can just be removed from free software.

File: 1444131668502.jpg (330KB, 847x609px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 847x609px

This is the difference between people who make operating systems because they like to make operating systems, and people who make operating systems because they like to make money.

The proprietary OS provider would see its user base as an asset to monetize, and I want no part in that.

The open source developer will always opt for functionality and performance over usability.

So, what we need is distributions to maintain a "support page" for users to post answers, have a few paid or volunteer users to answer those questions or aggregate from the community, while deleting the comments that are condescending or offensive?

Or perhaps a universal linuxanswers.com?

>>56561846
The biggest strike against linux as a mainstream OS is it hasn't been the default included OS for OEMs for the past 25 years

>>56561846
> less gets done to make it user friendly
You wouldn't believe how much is done to make Linux more user-friendly. Win32 application written by Pajeet will give you an obscure "error FGSFDS064FFFF", while Linux software in most cases will tell you what's wrong. "Are you root?", "No route to host", "Connection refused", "[emerg] unexpected "{" in <file>", etc, etc. It's usually easier to deal with Linux errors than with Windows errors.

>>56561881
It will bite you in the ass when Intel is paid to lock it out of it's desktop CPUs.
When 99% of the users are using a major corporate os no one will care about the cries of a tiny minority of autists.

>>56562384
that won't happen

linux is used by more than just a few desktop users and on cellphones

intel also makes more than just consumer cpus, they'd be giving the server market to amd immediately, for instance

>>56562458
Once the government decides Linux is unsafe (with a little help from MS and apple) you are out.
Except for the special google botnet versions of course

First the encryption will be banned, then the software will need to be nsa certified.

>>56562564
>encryption
>banned
Might as well ban free speech.

>>56561846
i survived but ditched it

>mainstream

This is just inverse hipster logic, whether something is useful is not inherent to its popularity.

>>56562608
CP isn't free speech

>>56563129
Having CP is, creating CP isn't. And nobody mentioned CP anyway.

>>56563129
>the only use for encryption is hiding pornography

>>56562564
Windows have been unsafe for decades and the government doesn't care

>>56562300
Very much this. Linux errors are some of the less cryptic. Much better than Windows and OS X in this regard.