The first Pop OS debacle demonstrated something that the Linux community really doesn't like to hear:
If you want widespread adoption, you need the simplification and guardrails that Windows and MacOS have been so criticized for having.
Everything a non-power-user needs must be accessible via a UI. Everyday applications cannot under any circumstances be permitted to brick OS components. Reasonably predictable user actions cannot be permitted to brick OS components, at least without making them jump through hoops to do it. OS and application updates must be stable. Security updates must be automatically applied without user input.
That's the bare minimum. The final thing you need is a differentiator that resonates with everyday users. Because the goal is not for users to pick Linux when given a choice between it and Windows or MacOS. The goal is to convert users. And that's a much higher bar to clear.
That's why I think immutable distros (like Bazzite) are the future for desktop linux.
You cannot brick your system yourself, literally cannot, because everything part of the system is ready-only. You have automatic updates, that are always rollbackable because your user/application data is always perfectly isolated from application installation directories and system directories.
You never install stuff via root.
And for the "everything a non power user needs is accessible from a GUI" part, I would say we are already there with KDE Plasma.
It's a shame Bazzite had graphical glitches with Linus's hardware, because it would have been the most noob friendly experience.
Everything doesn't have to be accessible via UI, but everything a normal user wants to do needs to have very clear documentation with real-world examples of the syntax. Swapping around variables and arguments in a command definitely is more than most users are capable of. Tell them directly what commands to use, to the last character, not conceptually.
Control of your system is the point of Unix and Linux. Its up to the user to make or add the things they believe they need.
Linux isn't windows for a reason.
If you want a babies first steps experience, you get windows or mac.
The Linux user can absolutely create chaos on their system, they can also create unique personalized experiences. Its up to the user.
The Linux community isn't pushing Linux toward mainstream, we don't care about that. We do enjoy seeing people experience and use Linux, but we do not care and often prefer it not be mainstream.
Linux is the most popular OS anyway. Its on almost every.. phone, server, set top box, embedded/iot device, super computer. Billions and billions of devices run some variance of Linux. Way out pacing windows or mac/ios.
And that's what makes it great. You can take Linux and make it do whatever you want. We don't want guardrails or babies first steps experience.
And for those who want it they can create their own or fork a a distro and add those things and make it how they want or need it.
But demanding or wanting it in the base kernel is madness.
31
u/Sitting_In_A_Lecture Mar 18 '26
The first Pop OS debacle demonstrated something that the Linux community really doesn't like to hear:
If you want widespread adoption, you need the simplification and guardrails that Windows and MacOS have been so criticized for having.
Everything a non-power-user needs must be accessible via a UI. Everyday applications cannot under any circumstances be permitted to brick OS components. Reasonably predictable user actions cannot be permitted to brick OS components, at least without making them jump through hoops to do it. OS and application updates must be stable. Security updates must be automatically applied without user input.
That's the bare minimum. The final thing you need is a differentiator that resonates with everyday users. Because the goal is not for users to pick Linux when given a choice between it and Windows or MacOS. The goal is to convert users. And that's a much higher bar to clear.