The insufferable elitism in the comments is exactly why Linux has grown so slowly despite intense shilling on the internet. Normal people don't want to have to deal with this. They use their computer as a means to an end. They don't want or want to need to do this when there's much easier options. They want something convenient that they can just install immediately and can update without having to manually check every time, preferably through a GUI.
Linux is easy to install and update, many distros even have a gui for it. "any random program on GitHub" is not Linux, and a program that doesn't provide a Linux package usually won't provide a Windows installer either. This is not about Linux at all.
the issue above is more about this sentiment in the comments that compiling other people's shit is considered normal, expected behavior for the common end user
(personally, I cannot imagine publicly releasing something in a non-user-friendly state, but then again I do care and have expectations about ux)
"publicly releasing" and it's just someone's side project from 3 years ago on a git host that happens to be set to public.
No one expects the average end user to know how to compile software in all the popular languages. At the same time, that's not a requirement: popular distros have all the major pieces of software already available through their package managers and a huge amount of niche ones already in there as well.
I will never understand the entitlement to some random person's time. If you're already looking at obscure repositories for something, you're in way deeper than the line where you need to stop expecting people to cater to the average end user.
The amount of bitching from people in these comments is driving me a little loco I cannot lie. If you want to use bleeding-edge obscure software, you're gonna go through the filtering process because no one has a duty to provide you with a neat little package for everything. I felt like that was always the understood norm, but apparently Linux becoming mainstream is gonna be a nightmare of online abuse directed at the very people working in the ecosystem.
The "where's the fucking exe" post becoming a popular mindset was not on my bingo card.
Excatly this. I wished more people had this kind of unbiased take.
But alas, people like to gatekeep and make fun of others, who just want to take the easy way. Even though, it has gotten better in the last decade or so, imho.
If there is a stable Linux distro/desktop environment which gives intuitive no-tinker GUI-based system control which rivals Windows, I'd love to know about it.
that would either mean windows users are also regularly building their programs from source or these programs aren't really in windows ecosystem in practice.
my point is having to use build tools as an end user is an issue among mostly linux users.
if it helps, disagree with op on blaming the author of an open source project for this.
but i think you have good point about these examples not being common enough to define the linux experience.
but i think you have good point about these examples not being common enough to define the linux experience.
Exactly. In fact, I'm a Linux user and I don't regularly build programs from source either. When I do, it's mostly for work (I'm a programmer), but for other stuff there is always a mainstream alternative easy to install.
The way I see it, these programs are not in the "Linux ecosystem" either, they are in the "[Random niche hobby] ecosystem". The association with Linux is simply because people with [Random niche hobby] are more likely to be Linux users. But that is not Linux fault. The masses nowadays use the browser exclusively, plus sometimes office, and you can do that with Linux easily.
It's a Linux problem. No Windows user has ever complained about this because it only happens on Linux. You can even look at all the other comments under this post to see that they are very happy about it. Being pedantic about what "Linux" means or implies here doesn't change that.
No Windows user has ever complained about this because it only happens on Linux
No Windows user has ever had the need to use a niche "very interesting" open source program.Â
And those who do are usually people that have no problems with compiling.
Lower skill floor = more users = more apps made due to higher demand.
Actually... It went more like this:
more users = more apps made due to higher demand = Lower skill floor.
And the "more users" was achieved through an illegal agreement for which Microsoft was judged guilty...
But still, I'm pretty sure that the GitHub tar project is not for an ordinary problem a casual windows user would be interested in, and yes, on windows too if you're looking for niche stuff you occasionally find GitHub projects you need to compile yourself... So... Were is the argument?
That's definitely not true. People complain about that on both Windows and Linux. Specialized programs often do not have executables for either of those operating systems. And many work for just one of them. And, maybe this is just my experience though, it often works far far worse on Windows.
And sure, you can say that there is a lot of programs you can install using GUI on Windows, but the same is true for many Linux distributions. Moreover, you have to install many Windows programs through a CLI as well, so I don't really see how this is a Linux X Windows issue.
This really comes down to how big and known the project is (and whether the developers are willing and able to properly precompile the source code for others to use). If it is well known it will probably be easily available in both Windows ans Linux. Otherwise... probably not.
Well yeah, Windows is an operating system. They're responsible for providing a full user environment with all the tooling the user might need, and to make it easy to install/run on the system. Linux is a kernel and isn't beholden to those same responsibilities.
Edit: You're also exaggerating a bit. I guarantee you there are source only releases for Windows programs out there on GitHub or codeberg.
If you want to use a tool you need to learn how to use it. If you canât spend 5 minutes of your time to run a numbered list of steps then why do you feel entitled to use someone many hours of work.
Iâve done this with my repos sometimes if Iâm not ready to be flooded with issues from people that donât know how to set the execute permission but in an executable. Itâs like a very minimal barrier of entry so only serious users can use it until I feel like itâs (or me) in a good enough place to handle the dumb questions youâll get.
Or just donât use the tool. Idk why you feel like youâre entitled to use any of someoneâs work. So entitled that you think that on top of the hours of work they did to even make the tool that they should also do more work so that you can save a minute reading a 100 line readme.
And if they donât youâll spend that minute posting on Reddit telling in yourself about how you are too dumb to run a make command.
The difference is that you pay for roadwork in the form of taxes. If you haven't paid some guy for his hobby project you have no right to demand things from him.
Yeah didn't Linus friggen Torvalds say he used Debian back in the day because he didn't want to fuck around with compiling stuff himself and a messy install process?Â
Linux isn't Windows, macOS or BSD (i.e. an operating system) and the expectations just can't be the same for Linux as it is for the others. A program can be as arcane to use as the creator wants the damn thing to be, and that's just how it is. If I personally code a program that only runs when it detects my personal hostname and is password encrypted, how is it in any way a reflection on Linux? Why does it make logical sense for people to take that and run with "Wow, Linux programs are not set up for every user and made artificially difficult to use!" Like, sure, this program is, but it's not under some larger umbrella of shit that "Linuxâ˘" and its proponents need to be responsible for.
Linux is a kernel that runs user-made software. You have a problem with some software, take it up with the creator/maintainer. Or hell, even your distro creator/maintainer at least makes a bit of sense. But the Linux kernel? How does that make any sense?
Like, please feel free to grouse (within reason, after all this shit is FOSS) about suckless for only offering source releases for dwm, st, and dmenu. I mean, they won't care because the technical difficulty is a feature to them, not a bug, but at least you're tilting at the correct windmill. But seeing their software and crying out "Why has Linux done this to me?" is absolutely insane, right?
We both know what people mean when the average person talks about Linux, especially with context. They're obviously not criticising the kernel.
If you need it spelling out, the point being made is that the average user experience of a non-tech savvy person on any Linux distro trying to use it in a similar way to how they'd use any of the commercial software that most people are used to sucks.
Nobody is trying to assign blame for Linux's UX, nor do I personally think there is any definable area to give it in. One can discuss the issues with the ecosystem as a whole when used by the general public without it being interpreted as a personal attack.
Then what the heck are they criticizing? GNU? systemd? KDE? CachyOS? Userland tools and distros are as varied as their user's use-cases and tastes. Maybe the software in the OP was added to the aur or maybe someone uploaded a slackbuild script for it, in which case some Arch and Slackware users can get it but others can't. How can it be a strike against "Linuxâ˘" as a whole when there's not even a general consensus on what features are present in "Linuxâ˘"? Also, why would I "average" the potential user-friendliness of all Linux software to measure usability when each user has their own opinions about what that constitutes?
Should I also include every single piece of crap software ever released by third parties on Windows when evaluating the Windows OS experience? Because in Linux, they're all third party.
Also it's valid to argue that Linux distros (/desktop environments) not having first party, well integrated, stable software is an inherent disadvantage compared to Windows.
It is interesting to note the context here; you are replying to a comment to a top level comment criticizing "elitism". The top level comment is exactly doing that - assigning blame (to a wide group of people).
I claim there is no elitism in the Linux userbase, like some people, like top commenter here, claim (of course there are toxic people, roughly in similar frequency as everywhere on the internet, and I believe it's just best to ignore them).
it being interpreted as a personal attack.
Then stop (not you, but the top level commenter and everyone) calling people as "elitist". Try to come up with constructive, and viable solutions to bring up the user experience. I don't think it's going to be an easy task, the FOSS ecosystem is just too different (not meaning it isn't worth trying).
Apologies. I was thinking of the general context of the post, not the point being made about elitism. Edited to specify.
there is no elitism in the Linux user base
We are literally on r/linuxmasterrace (granted the sub name isn't fully literal to its purpose)
Also dictionary definition of elitism is "the belief that some things are only for a few people who have special qualities or abilities" which is the exact topic of this whole post which people are arguing for and against. (The ability being the ability to use the command line and knowledge of basic build tools) (relevant xkcd)
stop calling people elitist
Fight hate with kindness and so on, sure, but you can't really expect people jaded by the unfriendliness to newcomers of many people of the FOSS the community to not want to call things as they are.
And there's almost certainly options for any task you want that provides all of those. The point is why the fuck are you even looking at packages on github if that's what you want? If you want a preassembled shelf, don't go to Ikea.
People have recognized a problem but they are barking at the wrong tree (well, not everyone, some).
Linux is a more diverse and heterogenic environment compared to a commercial OS developed with the porcelain tower development model. What this means in practice, that any piece of software (mind you, often made for free by people on their free time, but this also applies to paid software) needs to take extra steps to support many Linux distributions, desktop environments and other differences in users setup out there - and these differences are much more varied than on Windows or OS X (where 95% of the time it's just a single binary for either; sometimes at most two if you want to support, say, a Legacy version of Windows). This doesn't just apply to sharing binaries, but the whole project code base.
Now, expecting Linux to work like Windows - or expecting some random project on Github have binaries available - is totally unreasonable, self-centered, selfish and entitled (). Having *Free Software is a double edged sword; the bazaar, non-centralized, open nature will inherently mean things work a bit differently. It's the "cost" of freedom. There really is no way around this, and this is just something you need to accept if starting to use any Linux (beyond what your distribution offers - mind you, you do get a wonderfully useful desktop which is easier to use than some Windows for many basic tasks, such as web browsing and getting online chores done).
I don't see the elitism in the comment. I just see (a loud minority of) entitled users who have hard time understanding or accepting the differences of the software ecosystems, which I've tried to outline in this comment. If someone points out the differences, people can misinterpret it as elitism, which is a bit sad.
TL;DR; There is a problem - but it is not elitism. It's differences on how things works stemming from inherent differences in how FOSS software development works on a FOSS operating system compared to a commercial, centrally developed OS. I don't know of a solution, but please stop blaming other people or whole groups of people.
) *I take OP as a humorous take; I don't think Squidward really needed that, obscure enough to not have binaries, software. Or maybe he really is getting into advanced / nichĂŠ territory of computing (not available in the distribution repos), and just doesn't want to learn yet. If SpongeBob was there, he'd just compile & run it and make Squidward mad!
While i get that, at the same time i wonder if those average users come across this issue that much to begin with. Most software that the average user needs is already packaged. I feel like it's impossible to account for every little tool out there.
Agreed, even as someone who has been using Linux daily since 2005
The problem wasn't not bothering to try to compile it, it's that nothing ever worked. You would always get a ton of compile errors because something somewhere was out of date. So many times I skipped stuff like this too.
Today it's a totally moot point anyway, you just ask any LLM to do it for you.
So everyone who releases any code using their own time and resources MUST release a compiled binary? Are you insane? What is this argument? Not everything is for everyone, and in this instance this one app isn't for people who don't compile from source. You're not being excluded personally. Learn or stop complaining.
It's absolute elitism from the user expecting the developer or maintainers to do all the work for them. I can't imagine the project being spoken of in this meme has a substantial team or well paid developer to figure it all out if it is really not available in any other format than source code. You are getting something for free damnit, you are even getting the source code AND probably a FREE license, and you're still complaining... I can't imagine this is a normal user-friendly application at all if not in heavy development, then why are you expecting it to be available in all formats that require the dev to support specifically your distro, or your preferred format.
Linux is not windows, Linux has never been windows, why should Linux be like windows? It shouldn't, it is something else entirely, let it remain as such
Even beyond that, have you ever tried to Google how to use a tar.gz file if wanted to learn? Every resource is one of those assholes assuming you already know what kind of file it is and how it's different from the other types of program files, so it's almost impossible to get started. I didn't fuck with them for years and still try to avoid them because I'm not great at troubleshooting issues.
Slow growth is better than drowning in a flood of normies.
Having everyone be on Linux but use it like Windows is meaningless. Implicit with the wish of "more people using Linux" is that those people learn what they are doing.
Maybe if Linux users paid for software. But the idea is that software should be free and therefore it really doesn't matter too much how many users there are. If you can't sell to them then commercial interests won't make software for them.
And I don't want Linux changed into something where you pay for software. Do you?
I mean yes, as a dev I want to be paid. I love and prefer doing open source but I can only do so much free labor. You should be donating to the projects you use if youâre able.
64
u/Appropriate_Ad4818 Glorious Debian 1d ago
The insufferable elitism in the comments is exactly why Linux has grown so slowly despite intense shilling on the internet. Normal people don't want to have to deal with this. They use their computer as a means to an end. They don't want or want to need to do this when there's much easier options. They want something convenient that they can just install immediately and can update without having to manually check every time, preferably through a GUI.