• PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You got downvoted by the Linux fanboys, but it’s not wrong. Linux has a big issue with approachability… And one of the biggest reasons is that average Windows users think you need to be some sort of 1337 hackerman to even boot it, because it still relies on the terminal.

          For those who know it, it’s easier. But for those who don’t, it feels like needing to learn hieroglyphs just to boot your programs. If Linux truly wants to become the default OS, it needs to be approachable to the average user. And the average user doesn’t even know how to access their email if the Chrome desktop icon moves.

          • 474D@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I ran Linux Mint for close to a year and never used the terminal. It’s not 2000 anymore

          • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            No, I call any command-line interface that runs from an internal drive “DOS”. I do mean the term somewhat generically as a Disk Operating System.

            • andros_rex@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              I think “CLI” would be a better word choice. DOS is a more specific term.

              You are also able to install Linux distros that are primarily GUI based, or even install individual GUI interfaces for things you need.

      • DannyBoy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah but then I get an ancient version because I use Debian.

        I think the last time I used Blender I installed it through Steam.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          That is part of the deal with Debian. You get stable software… but you only get stable software. If you want bleeding edge software, you’ll have to install it manually to /usr/local, build from source and hope that you have the dependencies, or containerize it with Distrobox.

          If you go to a butcher, don’t complain about the lack of vegan options.

          • DannyBoy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m aware and I’m not complaining. Just sharing what I thought was a funny story of using Steam as a package manager.

      • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t really like the way software installation is centralized on Linux. It feels like, Windows being the proprietary system, they don’t really care about how you get things to run. Linux the other hand cares about it a lot. Either you have to write your own software or interact with their ‘trusted sources’.

        I would prefer if it was easier to simply run an executable file on my personal Linux machine.

        • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Software Installation is all but centralized on Linux. Sure, there is your store or package manager, but both Apple and Windows do have that, too. But you can always add any source you want to that store (flatpak is great), find an AppImage, some doubious install script, find your own packages and manually install them (like .deb), use Steam or sometimes, like with Blender, download, decompress and run it.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          You can also just download any binary file you find online and run it. Or use any install.sh script you happen to find anywhere.

          Package managers are simply a convenient offer to manage packages with their dynamically linked libraries and keep them up to date (important for security). But it’s still just an offer.

        • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The difference between a package manager and an app store is that the package manager allows you to pick your own sources. You can even run your own repository if you wanted to.

        • folekaule@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          You can still do that on Linux. Just download it and run. You can even compile it from source if that’s your thing.

          However, because there is a much greater variety of Linux distros and dependencies compared to Windows or MacOS versions, it’s better to either have a Flatpak, AppImage, or package from your distro’s repo. That way you’re ensured that it will work without too much fiddling around.

        • zogrewaste_@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Do you know about AppImages? Seems like those meet the need you’re complaining about.

          You still have to set the executable flag for them, but you can do that through the graphic user interface. No need to open a terminal.

        • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I don’t really like the way software installation is centralized on Linux.

          you have to interact with their ‘trusted sources’.

          I would prefer if it was easier to simply run an executable file on my personal Linux machine.

          I’m sorry but which is it? Do you want centralized software installation (this is literally how all of Microsoft Windows works.) Or do you want independent release software? (Those are the ‘trusted sources’ you seem to detest.)

          And there are plenty of programs that run as an independent file on Linux, installers even. They just aren’t labeled .exe.

          Either you want Linux and want independent control of your desktop system and environment or you want to be spoonfed everything as a Windows or OSX user. So which is it??

        • Matriks404@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Developers can just make a flatpak, publish it on flathub (or their own repo if they want, but ugh) and that’s it. Then you install the app through GUI package manager or by executing flatpak install <package name> command in your favorite terminal.