No, you’re not understanding what I’m getting at here. Linux is not windows. It cannot and should not aim to recreate it exactly, that’s a stupid idea from the get-go and will fail if attempted. Making every windows program work on Linux is also very difficult, but also, that’s the Wine team’s job, not KDE’s - KDE devs don’t have the expertise or knowledge to do that work. MacOS isn’t bad because it’s not identical to Windows, Linux should be judged similarly. It not being identical being seen as an issue is a mode of thinking that cannot lead to success. KDE has to be worth using because it’s good in its own right, not because it’s Windows without Microsoft.
I agree with the idea that selling that everything can be the same on Linux is not a great plan, but Linux advocates often focus on the wrong things to keep and change. They are often very focused on having a similar looking desktop, which nobody cares too much about, and really dismissive about software not having Linux ports, which is a catastrophic issue.
I do see what you see on principle, but I’d argue that the reasons KDE and Linux overall can come up short on “being good in its own right” are significant and often self-inflicted. No user should have to manually add a repository to their software manager, let alone a Windows “exile”. Being the only major OS without native or emulated compatibility with major software suites is a dealbreaker for many people and so on.
Whether KDE or Wine or the kernel teams are able to fix the issues remains irrelevant to the end users. I agree they should find their own optimal ways to fix things, I’m saying they haven’t found them in many of these areas.
I understand what you mean here, but how can KDE realistically make commercial software vendors port their software to Linux? What group or groups could incentivize this, and how can it be done without creating significant user growth first? (it’s a chicken and egg problem, so you can’t wait until the users are there if they’re waiting on software to be available)
It is a matter of emphasis I think. Do not imply that they will have to switch.
I think it is important to say that there is software for every use case on Linux. Because, while all know the few cases that are “less” well covered, it is absolutely true these days that, no matter what you want to do, you can do it on Linux. In many cases, the apps you use today are available on Linux too. Emphasize this first for people who are just forming an idea of Linux in their mind and maybe wondering if it could work for them.
After you have done the above, be honest that, not all the same applications are available. It is common that Windows users moving to Linux will have to find alternatives for some of the applications they used on Windows. Do not hide from it. But don’t lead with it either.
Finally, it is ok to mention that “in some cases”, Windows applications can be used on Linux through emulation. I would give a huge “for example” many Windows games work on Linux SteamOS and Proton. Maybe link to the list. However, how likely this is to work varies from application to application. For most software, it is better to find native alternatives.
Yeah, it’s absolutely a catch-22. That said, most Linux distros come with closed source repos deactivated out of the box. The nicer ones will at least ask you during the install process, but some don’t bother. It’s less about convincing the devs to port and more about exposing the stuff that already exists.
And Proton shows that a translation layer that works reliably on Linux isn’t impossible, it just needs the right amount of focus and investment. I don’t know how far the current tools are from that, though. Which is interesting, because I do use Linux on the daily and I haven’t even bothered to check in ages, instead moving to Windows for that, which tells you something.
No, you’re not understanding what I’m getting at here. Linux is not windows. It cannot and should not aim to recreate it exactly, that’s a stupid idea from the get-go and will fail if attempted. Making every windows program work on Linux is also very difficult, but also, that’s the Wine team’s job, not KDE’s - KDE devs don’t have the expertise or knowledge to do that work. MacOS isn’t bad because it’s not identical to Windows, Linux should be judged similarly. It not being identical being seen as an issue is a mode of thinking that cannot lead to success. KDE has to be worth using because it’s good in its own right, not because it’s Windows without Microsoft.
To quote myself just one post above:
I do see what you see on principle, but I’d argue that the reasons KDE and Linux overall can come up short on “being good in its own right” are significant and often self-inflicted. No user should have to manually add a repository to their software manager, let alone a Windows “exile”. Being the only major OS without native or emulated compatibility with major software suites is a dealbreaker for many people and so on.
Whether KDE or Wine or the kernel teams are able to fix the issues remains irrelevant to the end users. I agree they should find their own optimal ways to fix things, I’m saying they haven’t found them in many of these areas.
I understand what you mean here, but how can KDE realistically make commercial software vendors port their software to Linux? What group or groups could incentivize this, and how can it be done without creating significant user growth first? (it’s a chicken and egg problem, so you can’t wait until the users are there if they’re waiting on software to be available)
It is a matter of emphasis I think. Do not imply that they will have to switch.
I think it is important to say that there is software for every use case on Linux. Because, while all know the few cases that are “less” well covered, it is absolutely true these days that, no matter what you want to do, you can do it on Linux. In many cases, the apps you use today are available on Linux too. Emphasize this first for people who are just forming an idea of Linux in their mind and maybe wondering if it could work for them.
After you have done the above, be honest that, not all the same applications are available. It is common that Windows users moving to Linux will have to find alternatives for some of the applications they used on Windows. Do not hide from it. But don’t lead with it either.
Finally, it is ok to mention that “in some cases”, Windows applications can be used on Linux through emulation. I would give a huge “for example” many Windows games work on Linux SteamOS and Proton. Maybe link to the list. However, how likely this is to work varies from application to application. For most software, it is better to find native alternatives.
Yeah, it’s absolutely a catch-22. That said, most Linux distros come with closed source repos deactivated out of the box. The nicer ones will at least ask you during the install process, but some don’t bother. It’s less about convincing the devs to port and more about exposing the stuff that already exists.
And Proton shows that a translation layer that works reliably on Linux isn’t impossible, it just needs the right amount of focus and investment. I don’t know how far the current tools are from that, though. Which is interesting, because I do use Linux on the daily and I haven’t even bothered to check in ages, instead moving to Windows for that, which tells you something.