Thanks. However I disagree with your premise that Linux is pretty crappy for the average user compared to commercial alternatives.

Everyone has their own opinions of course but the desktop environments available are more than on par with Windows. The handling of software (for the most part) is better.

I personally feel that those people that decide it’s “crappy” are people who are so entirely familiar with Windows that anything else is difficult for them.

I have an older gentleman that I work with who was very interested in why my computer was “different” to all the others. I switched him to Linux years ago and after the initial getting used to it period (in which he asked a lot and learned a lot) he has used it without problem ever since. On his Windows system I spent countless hours on a regular basis dealing with problems for him and I rarely need to these days. His printers all worked, he listens to his music and does his web browsing and everything with no issues at all. He didn’t care that it was different. He didn’t label it as crappy. He just spent a little time learning the differences and he loves it.

As for the software. For most distributions the available software is a case of opening the software app, finding it and clicking install. No visiting websites and potentially downloading malware, etc. Software packages are kept up to date not just the operating system, but also all the software. Yes… there are exceptions, but exceptions don’t make the rule and for most people the distro’s repository will have the software they need.

I also disagree that the large part of the community is unwilling to pay for software. I’ve purchased software that runs on Linux. If there is software that is actually worth buying, especially if it provides something the open source community doesn’t or it does it better then there is people in the Linux community that will buy. Sure, there is also those that won’t, but that’s the same on Windows as well. Those unwilling to pay for software on Windows usually resort to piracy, whereas the Linux community resorts to the open source alternatives.

If Photoshop were released for Linux (and was the same level of quality as the Windows or Mac offerings) then I would once again pay for it. It’s brilliant and the only reason I don’t is that I cannot run it on Linux.

As mentioned, everyone is different and welcome to different opinions, but my experience is not that it’s crappy, quite to opposite and I’ve got others that would say the same if asked.

As long as you’re not a gamer. Valve has done a lot towards making gaming better on Linux, as have many popular game engines, but compatibility layers aren’t the answer. Consider Epic games and their recent statements about how they won’t put Fortnite on the Steamdeck. They said it’s because there is too many possible kernels and environments and they cannot be sure it will work and they don’t want the support nightmare that comes from that. If Valve had locked the Steamdeck down to a specific kernel and environment and did not allow users to mess with it, it would be a different story. Therefore, it seems my premise about the different distros isn’t so wrong after all.

I personally couldn’t care less about the Steamdeck or Fortnite but it does illustrate my point reasonably well.

Thanks for reading. I appreciate the response. 🙂