MX Linux Forum

Are the members of the team here ready to make an educated guess as to what people will do (those with no experience in Linux) when the EOL runs out on Windows 10? I just read a post from Elon about his experience with Windows 11 and he was none too pleased!

I think we should push our friends and family toward Linux, and help them with the setups, applications, etc. Seems like everyone is using Linux in the background for the real work, maybe now is the time to sell ourselves as the best in the world!
At least I feel that way!

I think we should not push. People need to be ready on their own to make the move. Remember what it was like when folks pushed you to do something you didn't want?

@needmorebrains
What is supposed to be wrong with W11?
I have tried it and like it better than W10.

needmorebrains wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 4:51 pm Are the members of the team here ready to make an educated guess as to what people will do (those with no experience in Linux) when the EOL runs out on Windows 10? I just read a post from Elon about his experience with Windows 11 and he was none too pleased!

They will move to Windows 11. Some may move to MacOS though.
North Korea is the only place I know of where it is actually the "Year of the Linux Desktop."

needmorebrains wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 4:51 pmI think we should push our friends and family toward Linux, and help them with the setups, applications, etc. Seems like everyone is using Linux in the background for the real work, maybe now is the time to sell ourselves as the best in the world!
At least I feel that way!

Apart from servers, I don't know a lot of people using Linux for real work. We don't do a teriffic job selling ourselves, because the Linux community contains a lot of GNU/Zealots and people who look down on general-purpose computer users, or simply do not understand or appreciate their requirements. People who want to do real work don't want to faff about in a terminal to enter a bunch of commands to get a bloody printer to work, we need to accept this reality.
I use Linux for real work myself, but I'm a dev, and I have a much higher tolerance of things going a bit wrong than the average user who doesn't want to (and likely doesn't have time to) tinker about.
But I still use Windows for certain things, such as updating firmware on hardware that Linux cannot update, or doing things that can't be done on Linux. There are still use cases for Windows at the moment.

I have to agree with AK-47. Many people will just move to Win11 and 'be done with it'.

There are a lot of machines that cannot run win11 because of its requirements, and it is truly sad as most of that hardware is excellent stuff and will run Linux well.

The "bad" in Windows 11 is getting worse imo. Ads, telemetry, CoPilot and the forced updates are all too much ( again - imo) and coupled with the mess 'that is windows' already its too much ...

This last year I moved over only 9 people to Linux. ( In 2022 I moved over 21.) And there could have been quite a few more moved over - most would have been fine working in MX. For most people the objection is Office, then a few more apps ( Quickbooks, Adobe and a few more.) It doesnt seem to matter what they are told, there is a mental block and until people can get around it all... Five of the ones that I moved were so disheartened with windows breaking them or slowing down perfectly good software that they gave up and gave MX a try.

The last few months I have been again evaluating various software that will help with all this, and I have two businesses that are 'close', but really my support is the *only* reason they would change.

Of the people I have converted, most I had converted over to FireFox, LibreOffice and Thunderbird a few years back. And this gave them a familiarity that worked well for the conversion and they felt at home with a few tweaks.

@CharlesV wrote:

The "bad" in Windows 11 is getting worse imo. Ads, telemetry, CoPilot and the forced updates are all too much ( again - imo) and coupled with the mess 'that is windows' already its too much ...

I agree. I did battle with one of my cousin's Win 11 laptop this weekend. When I received it on Saturday, it was taking twelve minutes (I timed it) to get to a working desktop (no more spinning blue circles) and when I returned it to her this afternoon I had that down to ninety seconds. I cleaned a whole bunch of crud out of it Saturday night, then it updated this morning and I had to do another cleaning. Don't get me started on what a hot mess the new, improved Outlook is.

if some one wants to install win 11 on to a non compliant system the best way around that is to use 'Rufus' usb iso burner.
but you will need the Windows 11 'International' iso then have Rufus burn that to USB stick drive but it must be the 'International' iso.
Rufus will then give you options to bypass certain restrictions that Microsoft have embedded within the iso.

my wife and grand kids use win 11 so i have win 11 23H2 running in Gnome boxes so i can keep up with it to fix there systems ..

Eadwine Rose wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:27 pm I think we should not push. People need to be ready on their own to make the move. Remember what it was like when folks pushed you to do something you didn't want?

Yes, maybe push is not the right word. I guess the overall experience is where we can "toot or own horn" so to speak. Great Insight! You should be the administrator! Oh yea, you are!!!!

j2mcgreg wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:03 pm @CharlesV wrote:

The "bad" in Windows 11 is getting worse imo. Ads, telemetry, CoPilot and the forced updates are all too much ( again - imo) and coupled with the mess 'that is windows' already its too much ...

I agree. I did battle with one of my cousin's Win 11 laptop this weekend. When I received it on Saturday, it was taking twelve minutes (I timed it) to get to a working desktop (no more spinning blue circles) and when I returned it to her this afternoon I had that down to ninety seconds. I cleaned a whole bunch of crud out of it Saturday night, then it updated this morning and I had to do another cleaning. Don't get me started on what a hot mess the new, improved Outlook is.

yup... Similar experience a week back. I thought win11 would be 'better than 10' and we would see less need for techies ... boy was I wrong on that one! win11 is a quivering pile and yeah.. I try desperately to talk people away from office and especially outlook!

GuiGuy wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:40 pm @needmorebrains
What is supposed to be wrong with W11?
I have tried it and like it better than W10.

Its hardware requirements are stricter that W10, and although there are workarounds, it is expected that MS will block those when W10 is EOL.

Chris

needmorebrains wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 4:51 pm Are the members of the team here ready to make an educated guess as to what people will do (those with no experience in Linux) when the EOL runs out on Windows 10? I just read a post from Elon about his experience with Windows 11 and he was none too pleased!

Some IT blog writers predicted a big surge of new Linux users with the MS announcement of the end of support for Windows 8.1 (EOL January 10, 2023). I don't recall any big uptick here. We saw much more of a temporary increase when Debian's xx.1 revision hit us for MX 21 and MX 23.

A memory from my Big Box semi-retirement job: Period - Windows 8 finally hits our retail world (2015). A grumpy old guy (younger than me!) comes in with a new laptop in a box and says: "Wipe this Windows 8 virus off my PC and put a real OS on it!" He had a Windows XP retail box in his other hand.

GuiGuy wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 5:40 pm @needmorebrains
What is supposed to be wrong with W11?
I have tried it and like it better than W10.

No judgement here. I am on a W11 machine right now, as my old hardware is physically too broken to work with anything. I don't really have any issues with it so far. Just a cheap HP from Walmart. I did have to change the ram to 8GB and the hard drive from 250 to 500GB, and then re-load the OS, but it works good.

Now my wife has a "will not run Windows 11" laptop that is on 10, and the mechanical hard drive is terribly sssllloooowww. So it will be our next MX machine.

FullScale4Me wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:54 pmSome IT blog writers predicted a big surge of new Linux users with the MS announcement of the end of support for Windows 7/8 (and Vista). I don't recall any big uptick here. We saw much more of a temporary increase when Debian's xx.1 revision hit us for MX 21 and MX 23.

To summarise:
Windows Vista introduction - 2007 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 2000 EOL - 2010 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 8 introduction - 2012 will be the Year of the Linux desktop.
Windows XP EOL v2 - 2014 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 10 introduction - 2015 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Not enough cared about Windows Vista for 2017 to be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 7 EOL - 2020 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 11 introduction - 2021 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.

although, technically we aren't far off considering how many people use Android.

Windows 10 EOL - 2025 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.

j2mcgreg wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:03 pm @CharlesV wrote:

The "bad" in Windows 11 is getting worse imo. Ads, telemetry, CoPilot and the forced updates are all too much ( again - imo) and coupled with the mess 'that is windows' already its too much ...

I agree. I did battle with one of my cousin's Win 11 laptop this weekend. When I received it on Saturday, it was taking twelve minutes (I timed it) to get to a working desktop (no more spinning blue circles) and when I returned it to her this afternoon I had that down to ninety seconds. I cleaned a whole bunch of crud out of it Saturday night, then it updated this morning and I had to do another cleaning. Don't get me started on what a hot mess the new, improved Outlook is.

As a added note, when I got my new W11 laptop, it had a slew of updates from Intel (UEFI Stuff) and SGX (Secure Containers) that were from Intel and not MS. I found out when the computer first started they (HP) loaded W11 S. So I had to remove the lock on S, then reboot into W11 (the real system), then grab and install all the stuff from Intel just to get the hardware "aware" of the environment. Then W11 started crashing (BSOD-SGX) so new W11 (MS) iso, then re-partition, install, then Intel, then MS, then on day two of the work, I now have a working W11 machine! Boots in 10 Seconds (or so).

Also, noticed on last Windows Update (I checked manually) three days ago, after just starting the device, a message from MS update that they were currently in the system updating "something?" and could I please check for updates again in a few minutes! I had just turned the machine on, and straight into update (12 seconds tops)! WOW!

This new computer got two ssd 512 drives one Win11 other MXL23.2 had a very quick look at a windows install 1st time in nearly 15 years dammit could not find the menus or anything at first, took a while, they changed the GUI look so much, I've yet to do updates on Win11 meh, MXL 23.2 running good that's what matters.

The reason I hear often about using Linux is " Nah I'm not that good at computers anyway I surf the web and play games (casino type games)"

So they don't do anything the least creative or productive or meaningful and that is their choice I can respect their wishes and leave them and and their computers use to them.

I'm just guessing OK ( probably wrong ) . . .
It's a fear gathered from wrong information about the complexity of using Linux, afterall Windows makes it easy it is on the computer when bought it then at home connect modem click the start button, and (as stated earlier) updates are done maybe one or two clicks sit back and let them (Win and the team) do everything because they know computing better than the customer.

That fear is similar to going into the water early in the morning go in feet then calves then knees or dive straight in and find and find out gee um this is really good.

Getting people past that fear of Linux is not something that will happen as long as humans have thumbs.

My 20c worth

artytux

W11 and W10 are OK if you install Firefox, Libreoffice and SeamonkeyMail. And refuse all Microsoft's "offers".

CharlesV wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:24 pm I have to agree with AK-47. Many people will just move to Win11 and 'be done with it'.

There are a lot of machines that cannot run win11 because of its requirements, and it is truly sad as most of that hardware is excellent stuff and will run Linux well.

The "bad" in Windows 11 is getting worse imo. Ads, telemetry, CoPilot and the forced updates are all too much ( again - imo) and coupled with the mess 'that is windows' already its too much ...

Every time a new version of Windows is released, the intransigents will complain, often loudly, that they'll never move. The more significant the changes in the next version, the louder they complain. "I will never switch from Windows XP to Windows Vista" was a common refrain, for years.

What I've noticed though, and this ties into your point about Windows 11, is that the changes are getting worse and the hardware is getting better. Windows 11 will be more advertisement-driven and contain more always-on telemetry. Meanwhile, almost any machine built in the last ten years can with the presence -- or addition -- of an SSD hard drive run a wide variety of middle-weight software without a hitch, indefinitely.

I keep wondering when I'm going to replace my last Windows machine. I bought it at the end of 2014 and it just keeps running. It won't win any beauty contests and it probably won't run the latest AAA games, but I can unplug it once a year, blow the dust out of it with a few sprays of compressed air, and plug it back in. It just keeps running. It's not incredibly fast but it runs fast enough for day-to-day tasks like browsing, text-editing, solitaire, and playing music and cat videos. We've reached the point in home computing where your processor is less important to your computing experience than your network connection is.

People, in general, don't upgrade their copies of Windows. Their copies of Windows get upgraded for them, and there was a big push by Microsoft in 2015 to upgrade any old version of Windows to Windows 10 in that first year of its availability. That free upgrade offer was only supposed to last for one year but they quietly continued it until PC manufacturers complained. To many people, and to OEMs, a new Windows release means buying a new machine. That's how OEMs make their money. If Windows can be upgraded for free indefinitely, the motivation to buy another PC goes away, which hurts their bottom line.

So as I read the tea leaves, this is a fairly unique situation. Microsoft has another unpopular product that is growing increasingly less popular over time. They are going to have to, again, push another free upgrade amnesty period for Windows 10 users, which will, again, upset manufacturers. And PC reliability has finally gotten to the point where you don't have to keep buying new machines every few years because they keep breaking or getting obsoleted by something twice as fast.

Eventually, people will not be able to upgrade to the next version of Windows for free. Either they'll need to pay for the upgrade or their hardware won't support it. And I think there are more people who will be in that situation than there were in the big Windows 8 "broken conveyance" era. Do I expect all of those abandoned users will convert? No, of course not. Most will give up and buy a new machine as they've been conditioned to do. Some will choose Apple hardware and end up on a different planned obsolescence cycle. But for the rest? They still have a chance.

I think you have a great take on this there, and are probably pretty close to what will happen.

I have been a developer of windows apps since .. mmm.. around 1990? ( win 3.1 ;-) Having been through every cycle, every upgrade, and every MS dev license and toolkit they put out. Some where back around 2010 I became unhappy with the message that MS continued to push out, and when they "abandoned their devs" ( my opinion.) that was it for me.

And while I seriously like(d) Win 10, The writing was on the wall and my Linux hunt truly began. I had played with Linux since around 1994ish and nothing was able to do anything I wanted / needed with one notable exception - Mepis. And I only have a small amount of time on it.

It has been a VERY long road to be able to run Linux as my daily driver, but having a MAC and supporting around 200 machines ( all windows ), left me with a serious case of 'there HAS to be something better than this'.. and I kept trying. FINALLY ... MX Linux!

The point to my 'not enough coffee yet' ramble ... I think it takes three things to really turn people to Linux:
1) having *enough* of the other guys,
2) having enough ability too do. (This is growing imo !)
3) As you point out - more online use and less 'have to have that app' use .

CharlesV wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2024 11:36 am I have been a developer of windows apps since .. mmm.. around 1990? ( win 3.1 ;-) Having been through every cycle, every upgrade, and every MS dev license and toolkit they put out.

I taught myself win32 assembly programming in 2020 during the lockdown. Prior to that my best experience writing Windows software was picking up a "Windows 95 Programming for Dummies" book at a Waldenbooks in college and never being able to comprehend or complete one of the very low-numbered chapters. Fortunately, I discovered Perl and Perl exists on just about every operating system. To this day I'm not really sure what a tchar is or how it's different from a wchar.

The point to my 'not enough coffee yet' ramble ... I think it takes three things to really turn people to Linux:
1) having *enough* of the other guys,
2) having enough ability too do. (This is growing imo !)
3) As you point out - more online use and less 'have to have that app' use .

I'll outline this in a slightly different way. Moving people over to Linux requires answering three questions:

1. Where are my files?
2. Do I have to run different software?
3. How much do I have to relearn before I can get work done?

If your entire workflow is running MS Word, Excel, and Adobe Photoshop and you store your files on the domain controller network share, switching to Linux is going to be a very different situation than someone who keeps their files in Dropbox and mostly sticks to Firefox, Steam games, and VLC. People will always need to know where their data is, how to quickly view and edit it, and, frankly, many of them don't care if they have a Liquorix kernel installed or not. UNIX-based operating systems were never really designed to be user-friendly and, when things go sideways and we end up having to drop down to single-user mode, they still aren't.

Once a platform like MX Linux is GUI-enabled enough that people don't have to worry about partition tables and the intricacies of running something obtuse like "useradd -m -d /home/username -g groupname username; passwd username", the question of "Do I have to run different software?" can quickly turn into "No, not really." If you use Steam, Firefox, and VLC on Windows, it works much the same on Linux. If you can tolerate a bit of a learning curve, LibreOffice is pretty close to being Word-compatible, so you won't have to convert many of your old .DOCX files. The real hurdle to converting people to Linux isn't "They need to understand that it's free/libre!" It's "They need to know they can run their software on this, too."

I think that there's a fourth factor in play these days --> money. With inflation prevalent everywhere users are going to balk when a Win 11 update wipes out their video or sound card (because their OEMs aren't providing updated drivers) and they are faced with having to buy while not really being able to afford new kit. I think that in the near future the Microsoft ecosystem will have priced themselves out of a large part of the market.

@DukeComposed and @j2mcgreg all excellent points!!

j2mcgreg wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2024 12:35 pm I think that there's a fourth factor in play these days --> money. With inflation prevalent everywhere users are going to balk when a Win 11 update wipes out their video or sound card (because their OEMs aren't providing updated drivers) and they are faced with having to buy while not really being able to afford new kit. I think that in the near future the Microsoft ecosystem will have priced themselves out of a large part of the market.

I think Microsoft would give Windows away to home users if they could. Honestly, the home consumer market of selling boxed copied to individuals is not where they make their money. The real money is in selling massive numbers of seats of the enterprise client editions to major corporations. The calculus, so far as I can see it, is balancing "letting qualified Joe Homeusers download a free upgrade to Windows 11" with "Dell and HP pay millions to put a Windows Home Edition image on literally millions of new PCs a year". And then, on top of that, comes balancing the respective outrage of individual PC owners against the OEMs who need to bank on the notion that a new TPM chip is needed to make the next version run correctly, and who know that most people won't or can't replace the original hard disk in their machine when it fills up, or buy a second disk and format it as a new volume.

When Windows 11 or 12 obsoletes your existing rig, Linux may be an option... but that presupposes the users' network, graphics, and sound cards are supported. Companies like NVIDIA have done better in recent days at improving their Linux drivers, but historically it's been hit or miss if your old commodity Dell just happens to have an obscure onboard graphics chipset that has an open source driver for it or not.

Sometime circa 2000 or so I had some low- or middle-tier Dell Dimension, I think, with an Intel i815 graphics chip on the motherboard. Not only was this chipset not well-regarded in the open source communities, but this was in the XFree86 era where you had to write your X11.conf files by hand through a lot of trial and error because the config file auto-generating software that came with XFree86 always guessed wrong. That PC ran Windows just fine, but on any other OS I could never get it to do more than run a stock standard TTY. There are probably thousands or tens of thousands of other dinky little hardware devices out there with no working Linux drivers, and, to your point, being unable to replace those stupid little chips with something functional, but more expensive, will be what stops someone from making the switch.

Can I just add a little "also tried" sub-category here?

I tried to use a full Hyper-V compliant W10 VM and add Linux to the system. To be fair, the computer has just enough resources to run one OS at a time, but I read in the MS learning docs that it could be done and Linux would run properly. Nope. That was a real lie. It (MX AHS) loaded, it emulated, it buffered, it ran. Like a 286 with OS2 warp! Where is my cursor? Hello, terminal, are you there?

I thought this might be a good tool to help show people that Linux is nothing to be afraid of, but this would scare (and scar) my wife for life!

Although the majority will be happy with the patronizing and stereotyping of Microsoft and Google, which will get horribly worse with Artficial Pseudo-Intelligence, there are still people who want to or need to do things in a reasonable and controllable way. Those are the ones taking alternatives into consideration.
There are some good Linux distros for that purpose. (Some things could easily perfected as mentioned above, if there was intention to do so.)
MX Linux is among those who stand out.

Interesting article about this very subject !

Neowin posted that in 2020 Linux was a market share of 1.53% ... and has NOW gone over the top of 4%! ( 4.03% to be precise AND that doesnt count ChromeOS )

https://www.neowin.net/news/linux-for-d ... atcounter/

Hi @CharlesV

I read the article. Interesting that they did make mention that ChromeOS was based on Linux! As are so many techhie things we use daily.

There was a recent news story about some public school IT admins limiting the hours that a student with a school-provided Chromebook could use the device on their homework. I guess that can be done for any device if you want that, but some of the parents seemed a little steamed about it.

https://www.inquirer.com/education/dept ... 40221.html
(disclaimer: I do not own the rights to this article and the news feed is a paid subscription service)

Carl

needmorebrains wrote: Tue Mar 05, 2024 2:53 pm Hi @CharlesV

I read the article. Interesting that they did make mention that ChromeOS was based on Linux! As are so many techhie things we use daily.

There was a recent news story about some public school IT admins limiting the hours that a student with a school-provided Chromebook could use the device on their homework. I guess that can be done for any device if you want that, but some of the parents seemed a little steamed about it.

https://www.inquirer.com/education/dept ... 40221.html
(disclaimer: I do not own the rights to this article and the news feed is a paid subscription service)

Carl

Ya interesting. Not just homework, but disabling the devices. ( Perfect "Big Brother" scenario here imo ) . Course, if the school provides...

I have been advocating for Linux many years now, and only one person I've spoken to about it actually uses it - and that's only because she had no computer of her own so I gave her my spare laptop (with MX-Linux on it). When she finally gets her own computer, I doubt she'll care if it's Linux or not.

It's the same thing I run into when I suggest using Diaspora or Friendica instead of Facebook and Tiktok, with their privacy issues and stuff. They don't care, so they don't listen. "I've got nothing to hide, so privacy doesn't matter to me," they'll say. In the immortal words of the great prophet Morphius,

You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."

Former Windows fan and veteran here, now refugee after the massive disaster that was 10, and then the afterbirth of a sequel that was 11...

AK-47 wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2024 10:10 pm To summarise:
Windows Vista introduction - 2007 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 2000 EOL - 2010 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 8 introduction - 2012 will be the Year of the Linux desktop.
Windows XP EOL v2 - 2014 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 10 introduction - 2015 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Not enough cared about Windows Vista for 2017 to be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 7 EOL - 2020 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
Windows 11 introduction - 2021 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.

although, technically we aren't far off considering how many people use Android.

Windows 10 EOL - 2025 will be the Year of the Linux Desktop.

Look, I understand why some Linux veterans here are skeptical about any year being the "year of the Linux desktop," but trust me, lads, and take it from me. Windows has never been this bad for this long with so few options for a good OS available (but they ARE still there, thank goodness for MX, AntiX, and, of course, Debian). And what's more, the idiocy and mismanagement in modern day Windows looks like it will only be getting worse now, not better. Windows 7 and even 8.1 used to be a trusty refuge from the xxxxxxx storm, but 7/8.1 is now just too damn old these days for any serious modern work, and the only good full Windows replacement that I know of nowadays is MX Linux. (Or AntiX if you need a very light OS.) You could also do vanilla Debian or Linux Mint Debian Edition, but those are just more stripped down versions of MX.

If you'd like more details about this, see my video on this subject here (skip to 56:48 for the section on Windows 10 and beyond): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE-fk3cg7LQ

Artim wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 6:05 am I have been advocating for Linux many years now, and only one person I've spoken to about it actually uses it - and that's only because she had no computer of her own so I gave her my spare laptop (with MX-Linux on it). When she finally gets her own computer, I doubt she'll care if it's Linux or not.

It's the same thing I run into when I suggest using Diaspora or Friendica instead of Facebook and Tiktok, with their privacy issues and stuff. They don't care, so they don't listen. "I've got nothing to hide, so privacy doesn't matter to me," they'll say. In the immortal words of the great prophet Morphius,

You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it."

Very true the stay with Windows at all cost is it a case of staying in that comfort zone even if there is better out there, ahh just takes a bit of effort, I have to say that is sad !

Also who was it that wrote up some papers not too many years ago -=- that even if you think you have nothing to hide they (Gov etc) they can if and when they want, they roll out crimes and charges against anyone just by bending your online history -- Now who was that, that wrote that ? Does anyone remember.

Here's the sort of scenario that would be necessary for a mass migration to Linux:
1. Microsoft issues an update that causes wiespread data loss in both the consumer and enterprise sectors with the only option being reinstall / restore from backups
2. Most users, despite their best intentions, have not backed up their data and see their loss as beingMicrosoft’s fault
3. Microsoft’s attempts at fixing the mess are about as effective as Boeing’s at fixing the 737 Max
4. In order to keep moving product, one of the big five( Acer, Asus, Dell, HP, Lenovo) actively starts promoting Linux as the alternative.

Otherwise people will stay with what they know until there is a compelling economic reason to change.

j2mcgreg wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:49 am Here's the sort of scenario that would be necessary for a mass migration to Linux:
1. Microsoft issues an update that causes wiespread data loss in both the consumer and enterprise sectors with the only option being reinstall / restore from backups

Yeahhh, that's already happened. lol https://web.archive.org/web/20230324191 ... les-files/

There's also been... MANY massive incidents with Windows 11 as well. But Linux IS gaining marketshare fast, even putting aside ChromeOS (and we should put it aside, because let's be honest, it's only use is to lock down enterprise and school computers). 4% is definitely nothing to sneeze at. I know this is a learned pessimism but I really wish you guys weren't so gloomy about this.

Thanks for the link but the screenshot says it all,

Nevermind would have been a good read.

artytux wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 6:32 pm Thanks for the link but the screenshot says it all,

Nevermind would have been a good read.

Try this link instead. https://www.howtogeek.com/658194/window ... les-again/

Thanks @siamhie works, I have a sad feeling for those Windows users it's not their fault, such a shame and shambles, Ooh wait should go read it, not assume.

The links I followed led to this , on this link





https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/win ... 5e92dddeb2

Since there might be some Win users here, might be helpful

Seems the image is gone portrait not landscape mode HUH.

artytux wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 6:32 pm Thanks for the link but the screenshot says it all,

Nevermind would have been a good read.

Well, that's annoying. My mistake. I updated the link in my post with an archived version from archive.org.

My first thoughts were Microsoft pulled the article Uh Nah can't do that, siamhie got it in the while.

The updated link good.

Thanks Though.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 6:26 am Former Windows fan and veteran here, now refugee after the massive disaster that was 10, and then the afterbirth of a sequel that was 11...

Same, I moved because Windows 7 extended support was on the chopping block at the time.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 6:26 amLook, I understand why some Linux veterans here are skeptical about any year being the "year of the Linux desktop," but trust me, lads, and take it from me. Windows has never been this bad for this long with so few options for a good OS available (but they ARE still there, thank goodness for MX, AntiX, and, of course, Debian). And what's more, the idiocy and mismanagement in modern day Windows looks like it will only be getting worse now, not better. Windows 7 and even 8.1 used to be a trusty refuge from the xxxxxxx storm, but 7/8.1 is now just too damn old these days for any serious modern work, and the only good full Windows replacement that I know of nowadays is MX Linux. (Or AntiX if you need a very light OS.) You could also do vanilla Debian or Linux Mint Debian Edition, but those are just more stripped down versions of MX.

You think most people care? I've heard this "Windows has never been this bad" style rhetoric since the first time I heard of the Year of the Linux Desktop. Maybe Windows is as bad as anything, but most people don't care, at least not enough to make the (often gargantuan) effort to jump ship. The majority now use Windows 10, they'll just jump to Windows 11. Or even Windows 12. I doubt there will be a massive hoard of new Linux users (as in, jumping from 1% to 10%) but sure, some people will move to Linux. It is worth having realistic expectations based on real data.

I think we can all agree here that this is being partially driven by the hardware. It is the same old story as the radar gun vs. radar detectors. I guess we should be glad for the moment that we can still gain access to our core UEFI/BIOS, but I see that going away (or only at the hardware developer level) soon. Everything in these machines now are so mutually exclusive (tinker with the registry/settings, system stops updating OS and hardware). And I am really getting concerned recently with all the graphics coding getting locked down for HDR and 4K. It will be an outright war with providers of GPU as to who will provide open source drivers for Linux. Graphics were developed agnostic to the OS by the major universities as a project for the computer science departments for the good of the system. Today I saw an article in the MS Learn Docs about Linux support in Azure/Entra that point to working versions of Linux VM on the servers with Commercial Companies making their kernels and OS fabric unique to their flavor. I guess if they make it theirs they can charge a fee for support in the MS World? Now I am really confused.

I've stayed with Intel for most of my computers few exceptions and the Intel Gen 14 with Intel ARC graphics is well supported in the Linux later kernels ( depends on Distro ) Inc Liquorix offering and phow does it go off, reduced cpu use from 65% ave down to 10 to 15% ave use spread over the many cpu's , it depends on who makes a Linux graphics compatible, that there is problem with Nvidia on any help forum is no surprizer.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 5:55 pm

j2mcgreg wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:49 am Here's the sort of scenario that would be necessary for a mass migration to Linux:
1. Microsoft issues an update that causes wiespread data loss in both the consumer and enterprise sectors with the only option being reinstall / restore from backups

Yeahhh, that's already happened. lol https://web.archive.org/web/20230324191 ... les-files/

There's also been... MANY massive incidents with Windows 11 as well. But Linux IS gaining marketshare fast, even putting aside ChromeOS (and we should put it aside, because let's be honest, it's only use is to lock down enterprise and school computers). 4% is definitely nothing to sneeze at. I know this is a learned pessimism but I really wish you guys weren't so gloomy about this.

I don't consider myself gloomy about it, just pragmatic. I don't own stock in Linux, whether it gains or loses marketshare doesn't really impact me on an individual level. I don't even consider it all that fantastic of a platform, to be honest. But it works, and it's configurable, and it has a better X11 situation than the BSDs do, so I use it.

I think the important thing to consider here is that Microsoft has never sought to hurt their users. Even through all the misadventures of Windows Vista, and the Windows 8 swipe-heavy UI with the tiles and the charms bar, the company understands that happy users equals more revenue. Sometimes they guess correctly, sometimes they guess incorrectly. The push to Windows 11 and a new TPM minimum is predicated on a mutual desire to help OEM sales, and to make computing, overall, safer for 85% of the computing population. However you feel about a private corporation controlling the world's most popular PC operating system, wanting a more secure platform is a good call.

When you're a multibillion-dollar multinational corporation you have to think long-term, and you have to play the long game. With a billion users and a 30-year legacy of backwards compatibility, you can't do the Google thing of saying "We're just not going to support this after 18 months from now." There are sunsetting schedules and extended support contracts with big, three-letter agencies. It's a whole different ball game.

So yes, Microsoft has had bugs, major and minor, but nothing that could be considered reign-ending. They work to fix them when they occur, and they primarily work to prevent them entirely. The question will never be "Is Windows broken or dangerous?" It will be "Is Windows being exploited by its management to harm users?" This can mean harming them by means of removing privacy options, increasing advertisements, and making superfluous administrative decisions to restrict a user's right to control his or her hardware or online experience. To my first point, this kind of harm may not not be seen by the company as harmful, and it is that disconnect that can be an issue.

Imagine a world where Windows requires you to run a UEFI-only install. Imagine a world where Windows requires your password to always contain a capital letter 'G'. Imagine a world where your Edge browser must always go to msn.com as its start page. Some of these are ridiculous demands, but as a company Microsoft can make them. The company wants profit and marketshare. It can gain these things by making a product that consumers want. However, it can also make profit by forcing a copy of, say, Candy Crush onto every install. The real problem is that you, as a consumer, don't control the decisions that directly impact you and your computer when you run Windows on it.

People won't desert Windows because it ends up corrupting their data or ruining their machines. They'll abandon it when they realize they want to regain control of the hardware they paid for.

AK-47 wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:51 pm You think most people care?

Well, judging from the 4% and rising marketshare, and also how many disparaging comments about Windows I see in every single tech sphere I'm in, yes. I do.

AK-47 wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:51 pm I've heard this "Windows has never been this bad" style rhetoric since the first time I heard of the Year of the Linux Desktop.

True, but this time, I got some actual ammo to back that up with. Is 2024 going to be the year of the Linux desktop? Who the hell knows. But do I believe Linux is at least steadily gaining marketshare? Oh yeah.

AK-47 wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:51 pm at least not enough to make the (often gargantuan) effort to jump ship.

It really isn't that much. Is it an effort? Yes. Will some employers not be able to switch even if they wanted to? Yep. But gargantuan? Let's be real here. Linux has never been easier to use. And in some ways, it's even easier than Windows.

AK-47 wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:51 pm they'll just jump to Windows 11

And get smacked with another load of xxxxxxx from Microsoft in the process. Sooner or later, even the most ardent Windows fan is going to have to ask themselves what I asked myself, "Is this really worth putting up with anymore?" And the answer is going to be, "No."

AK-47 wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:51 pm I doubt there will be a massive hoard of new Linux users (as in, jumping from 1% to 10%) but sure, some people will move to Linux. It is worth having realistic expectations based on real data.

Sure, but it doesn't need to be a massive hoard. Right now, Windows' marketshare is steadily leaking over to Linux. And this leak will not be something easily stopped now.

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:14 am I think the important thing to consider here is that Microsoft has never sought to hurt their users.

Errrr... You should define, "hurt." I can think of plenty of times in Windows 10 and 11's history where Microsoft has been outright greedy and incompetent.

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:14 am The push to Windows 11 and a new TPM minimum is predicated on a mutual desire to help OEM sales, and to make computing, overall, safer for 85% of the computing population.

Except user safety is not something Microsoft should decide and force upon its users. They can have solid defaults, yes, but outright forcing TPM was a very bad idea, even if the move might maybe possibly have been born of good will.

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:14 am When you're a multibillion-dollar multinational corporation you have to think long-term, and you have to play the long game. With a billion users and a 30-year legacy of backwards compatibility, you can't do the Google thing of saying "We're just not going to support this after 18 months from now." There are sunsetting schedules and extended support contracts with big, three-letter agencies. It's a whole different ball game.

Microsoft handled this by simply having fixed major releases of its OS. It didn't matter so much, for example, when Vista released because XP was still right there and fully supported, and was for years. If an agency/company wasn't ready to switch, they didn't need to. They could always stick to the last fixed major release and be golden until they're finally ready to switch. Then, in a brilliant genius move (/s), Microsoft decided to move everything to a rolling release cycle. With the LTS versions of Windows only for the agencies/corporate elites apparently. The mere consumer plebs could now only buy the shitty spyware version of Windows. And even for the LTS versions of Windows, they cut down their support dates so even the VL customers were forced to switch to a new version sooner rather than later. So now, backwards compatibility is even more of an issue because, ironically, Microsoft effectively blocked staying on older releases of Windows from their VL customers.

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:14 am The question will never be "Is Windows broken or dangerous?" It will be "Is Windows being exploited by its management to harm users?"

Yep, it is, without a doubt. Before 10, not so much, but now, yes. Lines are now being crossed that were never ever crossed before.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:39 amWell, judging from the 4% and rising marketshare, and also how many disparaging comments about Windows I see in every single tech sphere I'm in, yes. I do.

"tech sphere" - this is what I mean, you're considering its usage amongst tech-heads like you and I. Not ordinary average users, i.e. the majority using these devices.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:39 amTrue, but this time, I got some actual ammo to back that up with. Is 2024 going to be the year of the Linux desktop? Who the hell knows. But do I believe Linux is at least steadily gaining marketshare? Oh yeah.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/03 ... -desktops/
There is a graph that explains what's going on, and at one point it went beyond 4% and dropped down. And then you have the line representing Windows which is steadily growing in share, but it's macOS that's taking the hit.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:39 amIt really isn't that much. Is it an effort? Yes. Will some employers not be able to switch even if they wanted to? Yep. But gargantuan? Let's be real here. Linux has never been easier to use. And in some ways, it's even easier than Windows.

Q: How do I scan documents?
A: Run this bunch of commands with strange names in a terminal.
Q: It didn't work.
A: You used "fo", not "foo".
...
Q: How do I install this cool calculator program I found on the internet?
A: It will break your system because it's a foreign package not on the official OS distribution repository.
...
And then there's the issue of people installing operating systems. Most people just want to use the device, and it happens to come with Windows, which can do everything they want it to.

This may not be gargantuan for people like you or me, but most people aren't you or me.

AK-47 wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:51 pmSure, but it doesn't need to be a massive hoard. Right now, Windows' marketshare is steadily leaking over to Linux. And this leak will not be something easily stopped now.

See the graph on Ars Technica, doesn't seem like Windows share is going down or leaking.

i believe that when Microsoft force Windows as a Service (WaaS) just like they have done with Microsoft office then you will see people start to jump ship to Linux.
i also dont think that WaaS is far away ..

I really do believe that @MrSteve . Windows 10 just got a new update today just to remind you if you have an EOL W10 version, you need (will) updates to get you ready. Or, is W11 right for you? And do you have copilot? Why is Edge not your default browser, fix that "problem" right now (or not, we'll bug you later...) please stop the madness!

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:14 am

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 5:55 pm

j2mcgreg wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2024 8:49 am Here's the sort of scenario that would be necessary for a mass migration to Linux:
1. Microsoft issues an update that causes wiespread data loss in both the consumer and enterprise sectors with the only option being reinstall / restore from backups

Yeahhh, that's already happened. lol https://web.archive.org/web/20230324191 ... les-files/

There's also been... MANY massive incidents with Windows 11 as well. But Linux IS gaining marketshare fast, even putting aside ChromeOS (and we should put it aside, because let's be honest, it's only use is to lock down enterprise and school computers). 4% is definitely nothing to sneeze at. I know this is a learned pessimism but I really wish you guys weren't so gloomy about this.

I don't consider myself gloomy about it, just pragmatic. I don't own stock in Linux, whether it gains or loses marketshare doesn't really impact me on an individual level. I don't even consider it all that fantastic of a platform, to be honest. But it works, and it's configurable, and it has a better X11 situation than the BSDs do, so I use it.

I think the important thing to consider here is that Microsoft has never sought to hurt their users. Even through all the misadventures of Windows Vista, and the Windows 8 swipe-heavy UI with the tiles and the charms bar, the company understands that happy users equals more revenue. Sometimes they guess correctly, sometimes they guess incorrectly. The push to Windows 11 and a new TPM minimum is predicated on a mutual desire to help OEM sales, and to make computing, overall, safer for 85% of the computing population. However you feel about a private corporation controlling the world's most popular PC operating system, wanting a more secure platform is a good call.

When you're a multibillion-dollar multinational corporation you have to think long-term, and you have to play the long game. With a billion users and a 30-year legacy of backwards compatibility, you can't do the Google thing of saying "We're just not going to support this after 18 months from now." There are sunsetting schedules and extended support contracts with big, three-letter agencies. It's a whole different ball game.

So yes, Microsoft has had bugs, major and minor, but nothing that could be considered reign-ending. They work to fix them when they occur, and they primarily work to prevent them entirely. The question will never be "Is Windows broken or dangerous?" It will be "Is Windows being exploited by its management to harm users?" This can mean harming them by means of removing privacy options, increasing advertisements, and making superfluous administrative decisions to restrict a user's right to control his or her hardware or online experience. To my first point, this kind of harm may not not be seen by the company as harmful, and it is that disconnect that can be an issue.

Imagine a world where Windows requires you to run a UEFI-only install. Imagine a world where Windows requires your password to always contain a capital letter 'G'. Imagine a world where your Edge browser must always go to msn.com as its start page. Some of these are ridiculous demands, but as a company Microsoft can make them. The company wants profit and marketshare. It can gain these things by making a product that consumers want. However, it can also make profit by forcing a copy of, say, Candy Crush onto every install. The real problem is that you, as a consumer, don't control the decisions that directly impact you and your computer when you run Windows on it.

People won't desert Windows because it ends up corrupting their data or ruining their machines. They'll abandon it when they realize they want to regain control of the hardware they paid for.

@DukeComposed I just wanted to say your post is awesome and well thought out. It made me think of the numerous forums I have worked and read over the years, as well as here on MX/AntiX where someone ask for help (sometimes the wrong question, with no system data) then we try so hard to help them (many weeks or days), then they get upset and give up. We live in a world where only about 15% of my age group can actually read, comprehend, and do their own auto repairs (I'm in my 60's now) and need I say that computer experience starts in 1979. And for most of my life, I couldn't afford a computer, I just got to use them at work.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 3:03 am "tech sphere" - this is what I mean, you're considering its usage amongst tech-heads like you and I. Not ordinary average users, i.e. the majority using these devices.

And even in non-tech spheres, I see rage. And as people are gradually forced to update to WIndows 11 at least, that rage is only going to grow.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 3:03 am https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/03 ... -desktops/
There is a graph that explains what's going on, and at one point it went beyond 4% and dropped down. And then you have the line representing Windows which is steadily growing in share, but it's macOS that's taking the hit.

Fine. Even if it's only 3.8%, that's still a huge amount of growth.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 3:03 am Q: How do I scan documents?
A: Run this bunch of commands with strange names in a terminal.
Q: It didn't work.
A: You used "fo", not "foo".

What are you talking about? You don't have to run any commands. https://help.brother-usa.com/app/answer ... an---linux That was the first result when I searched it.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 3:03 am Q: How do I install this cool calculator program I found on the internet?
A: It will break your system because it's a foreign package not on the official OS distribution repository.

Not necessarily, but yes, you're right. It is generally a bad idea. With that said, many popular programs have a Flatpak version that can be easily downloaded and installed, or at very least a .deb install package. For those that do not, it's very likely some proprietary crap that is still stuck on Windows like the Adobe suite. Again, I never said transitioning to Linux was easy, but it's not a gargantuan task.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 3:03 am which can do everything they want it to.

Except allow users to own and control parts of the OS and stopping the flow of unwanted updates and advertising without downloading and installing third-party programs. And even those third-party programs need to be updated in order to be able to counter the latest nonsense Microsoft has pushed out this month. I swear, it seems Microsoft can't go a single freaking month without screwing with Windows in some unwanted way.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:13 pm Except allow users to own and control parts of the OS and stopping the flow of unwanted updates and advertising without downloading and installing third-party programs. And even those third-party programs need to be updated in order to be able to counter the latest nonsense Microsoft has pushed out this month. I swear, it seems Microsoft can't go a single freaking month without screwing with Windows in some unwanted way.

Would or could that be too many cooks in the kitchen and no higher up to keep an eye on what the collective is doing ?

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:59 am Except user safety is not something Microsoft should decide and force upon its users.

You're arguing "user safety is not the responsibility of the operating system." That's not a serious opinion. As I said earlier, when a company has a billion users, things are a little different than you or me as home hobbyists or as an experienced sysadmin of a few dozen machines. Ransomware attacks, rootkits, and botnets are quickly becoming a normal aspect of the modern online ecosystem, so taking proactive measures to secure individual machines at scale isn't just a good idea, it's a necessity.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:13 pmAnd even in non-tech spheres, I see rage. And as people are gradually forced to update to WIndows 11 at least, that rage is only going to grow.

I've been seeing that since at least Windows XP. It was also like that for Windows 95 when there was a huge change in the GUI. Yet, people still upgraded, because they were locked into it and couldn't find a reasonable alternative.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:13 pmWhat are you talking about? You don't have to run any commands. https://help.brother-usa.com/app/answer ... an---linux That was the first result when I searched it.

That was just an example. Have you seen the support forums just around here? Many simple tasks require quite a lot of configuration before they get working. My audio still doesn't work 100%, I have to run "alsaunmute" every time I start the system up. I'm sure I'll figure it out eventually but for now I can tolerate this. Most users won't tolerate this kind of loss in functionality.

Sure the situation is getting better and better, but will it be in time for the end of life for Windows 10? I'm not sure, but I'd rather not be disappointed by being overly optimistic.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:13 pmNot necessarily, but yes, you're right. It is generally a bad idea. With that said, many popular programs have a Flatpak version that can be easily downloaded and installed, or at very least a .deb install package. For those that do not, it's very likely some proprietary crap that is still stuck on Windows like the Adobe suite.

This proves my point. So software that people need to do some work is just "proprietary crap" and is a "bad idea" to install? For Windows, I can run an EXE or Windows Installer package and it will work on multiple versions of Windows. This is all but impossible in Linux. You can download package files, but they often only work on a specific version of a specific distro. Flatpak improves things slightly, but having to download hundreds (if not thousands) of megabytes just for a simple program is the epitome of bloat.

Honestly, if Linux could fix this (or if Microsoft or Apple manage to screw this advantage up in their next release), and find a way to make compatibility between versions and distros a thing, the market share could go up to 40% rather than 4%. Not having to support and cater for a plethora of different and incompatible ways of initialising the OS and managing services would be a start.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:13 pmAgain, I never said transitioning to Linux was easy, but it's not a gargantuan task.

For me, it was a gargantuan task to switch, this was in 2018/2019 when I took Linux seriously. Linux behaves very differently to Windows that I was familiar with, the way programs and drivers work and are installed on Linux is wildly different. I spent months distro-hopping and trying to work out which desktop environment would work for me before settling on a combination I could tolerate the most.
And even back then I wasn't entirely unfamiliar with Linux, and by then had years of experience dealing with BSD systems. Imagine a user with no such prior experience, in many cases it will be a real culture shock.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:13 pmExcept allow users to own and control parts of the OS and stopping the flow of unwanted updates and advertising without downloading and installing third-party programs. And even those third-party programs need to be updated in order to be able to counter the latest nonsense Microsoft has pushed out this month. I swear, it seems Microsoft can't go a single freaking month without screwing with Windows in some unwanted way.

I concur. Although my point is that it can do what they want, or rather, what they have to do, with little configuration, straight out of the box. Convenience at its finest (which as you just pointed out, comes at a cost).

artytux wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:34 pm Would or could that be too many cooks in the kitchen and no higher up to keep an eye on what the collective is doing ?

Honestly, while some of Windows' quality control problems as of late could be blamed on that or mismanagement, its most egregious problems arise from just straight up greed on the part of execs.

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:39 pm You're arguing "user safety is not the responsibility of the operating system." That's not a serious opinion. As I said earlier, when a company has a billion users, things are a little different than you or me as home hobbyists or as an experienced sysadmin of a few dozen machines. Ransomware attacks, rootkits, and botnets are quickly becoming a normal aspect of the modern online ecosystem, so taking proactive measures to secure individual machines at scale isn't just a good idea, it's a necessity.

You're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying at all that Windows shouldn't be secure or even that it shouldn't be taking advantage of TPM hardware. What I am saying is that Microsoft should be giving us a choice instead of forcing that decision upon its users. Windows has billions of users, yes, which is actually why it's even MORE important that users are allowed to configure their systems as they want. Everyone's use case for an operating system is different, even if just slightly. Therefore, giving users choice is incredibly important.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:46 pm It was also like that for Windows 95 when there was a huge change in the GUI. Yet, people still upgraded, because they were locked into it and couldn't find a reasonable alternative.

They weren't locked into Windows 95 because Windows 3.1 was still supported. Also consider that back then, the internet wasn't really a big thing at all, so security was much less of an issue to worry about, so having to update was much less of a thing. Furthermore, the Windows 95 interface was a MAJOR step forward. In fact, even today, you still see pillars of Windows 95's UI design in interfaces today. This is because Microsoft actually put in some major man-hours and testing to see how best to make a 2D interface for an OS. The development of the 95 UI is actually very fascinating and I highly recommend reading about it when you can.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:46 pm That was just an example. Have you seen the support forums just around here? Many simple tasks require quite a lot of configuration before they get working. My audio still doesn't work 100%, I have to run "alsaunmute" every time I start the system up. I'm sure I'll figure it out eventually but for now I can tolerate this. Most users won't tolerate this kind of loss in functionality.

I have seen them. Most of the problems are actually caused by hardware and older drivers. That or people messing up their systems with PPAs. Of course there are issues that aren't caused by those two, but they're rare. Hell, one of the big reasons why I'm even here in the first place is because MX has an INCREDIBLE track record for raw stability and ensuring that things just work right out of the box. Do not discount your own OS here. You guys have done a really damn good job, and I also love that you guys are in the trenches, so to speak, as in, on the support forums solving problems users have. It ensures even better quality control and also helps you guys know if there might be something majorly amiss with the OS. And also, let's not forget that Windows 10 and 11 aren't exactly bastions of stability here. Very far from it. Windows sometimes also requires the command line to use some of its features. Pinging a website to test your internet connection for example requires opening the command line, just off the top of my head. And finally, when you do get an issue on Windows, it's utterly infuriating to try and fix because of how ridiculously vague the errors are. On Linux, at very least I'm given something to search with. (By the way, you should open up a thread about your issue. That is a really weird bug.)

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:46 pm Sure the situation is getting better and better, but will it be in time for the end of life for Windows 10? I'm not sure, but I'd rather not be disappointed by being overly optimistic.

Fair enough I guess.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:46 pm This proves my point. So software that people need to do some work is just "proprietary crap" and is a "bad idea" to install? For Windows, I can run an EXE or Windows Installer package and it will work on multiple versions of Windows. This is all but impossible in Linux. You can download package files, but they often only work on a specific version of a specific distro. Flatpak improves things slightly, but having to download hundreds (if not thousands) of megabytes just for a simple program is the epitome of bloat.

That's definitely not impossible on Linux. Just not recommended. Again, sometimes you can get away with installing something via a .deb package. I've personally done it a few times in risk of voiding any chance of official MX support and I haven't had any issues. Besides, there's problems with Windows' own system as well. If you install something out of the Debian Stable repo and it doesn't work, that's an official problem, and with an MX OS, you have multiple people on two different dev teams you can turn to for support on that. On the other hand, if something doesn't work on Windows? lol Too bad. Contact the software maker for support who may or may not give it. And hell, even if there's something wrong with Windows itself, unless you're a VL customer, you're also going to get xxxxxxx for support. They're not going to care unless it's a major system-breaking issue affecting a ton of people. But yeah, my point is that this isn't as cut-and-dried in Windows' favor as you'd think.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:46 pm Flatpak improves things slightly, but having to download hundreds (if not thousands) of megabytes just for a simple program is the epitome of bloat.

Flatpak is definitely not the ideal way to install something, but it's also not the major issue you're making it out to be either. Once you download the large amounts of dependencies, you don't need to download them again, and install sizes get much more reasonable for future programs you install.

AK-47 wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 8:46 pm Not having to support and cater for a plethora of different and incompatible ways of initialising the OS and managing services would be a start.

In my opinion, this is technically already a fixed issue. Debian is the perfect OS to standardize around, and anytime you see a Linux version of a program, it always comes in .deb format. That is, assuming that they didn't make a flatpak version of the program, which they probably have. You can also convert an install package between different formats and there's also tools like Distrobox.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 9:53 pm You're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying at all that Windows shouldn't be secure or even that it shouldn't be taking advantage of TPM hardware. What I am saying is that Microsoft should be giving us a choice instead of forcing that decision upon its users. Windows has billions of users, yes, which is actually why it's even MORE important that users are allowed to configure their systems as they want.

Your exact words "user safety is not something Microsoft should decide" are unambiguous. If you know a better way to get a billion users to all agree on the most secure way to run their machines, I'd love to hear it. What you aren't appreciating is that if the company wasn't making security choices on behalf of its users, those choices would never be made. The overwhelming majority of Windows users don't mess with their settings too much, and fewer still really understand the intricacies of asymmetric key-signing algorithms or how they protect the startup process. A compromised machine these days is a threat to more than just its owner, so companies like Microsoft and Apple have more of an obligation than ever to protect their users to avoid creating a compound online threat. Cars come with seat belts. Firearms come with safeties. You're welcome to tamper with your car and your guns if you want, but the manufacturers have an obligation to add those safety features and make them the default. Expecting a billion drivers to knit their own seat belts in the name of personal freedom is just ridiculous.

I just want to say, it's kind of weird that I have to defend Linux on a Linux forum.

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 10:23 pm Your exact words "user safety is not something Microsoft should decide" are unambiguous.

Those aren't my exact words actually. My exact words are:

Arnox wrote:Except user safety is not something Microsoft should decide and force upon its users. They can have solid defaults, yes, but outright forcing TPM was a very bad idea, even if the move might maybe possibly have been born of good will.

A good example of what I'm talking about here is one of Windows XP Service Pack 2's features. As a part of the effort to combat the massive spread of malware and cover holes on the system, Microsoft put in an in-built firewall. That firewall, though, wasn't something that Microsoft forced on its users. You could still turn it off if you really wanted to, and you could also customize it for more granular control. It was a sensible thing to put in that both increased security and gave users more control over their systems.

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 10:58 pm A good example of what I'm talking about here is one of Windows XP Service Pack 2's features. As a part of the effort to combat the massive spread of malware and cover holes on the system, Microsoft put in an in-built firewall. That firewall, though, wasn't something that Microsoft forced on its users. You could still turn it off if you really wanted to, and you could also customize it for more granular control. It was a sensible thing to put in that both increased security and gave users more control over their systems.

I beta tested that service pack before it was released. I understand how important packet filtering was for the Windows platform to eliminate entire classes of attacks to which it was, until then, highly vulnerable. Pushing TPM has been a project years in the making and again will eliminate a number of different attack vectors. If you don't want to use your TPM chip, you can turn it off. Same as the firewall. There's no difference between disabling one security feature and another. You sound like you're complaining that making a security feature a requirement offends you. You can still turn it off, but most people won't, and that's the whole point.

DukeComposed wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 12:21 am

Arnox wrote: Thu Mar 07, 2024 10:58 pm A good example of what I'm talking about here is one of Windows XP Service Pack 2's features. As a part of the effort to combat the massive spread of malware and cover holes on the system, Microsoft put in an in-built firewall. That firewall, though, wasn't something that Microsoft forced on its users. You could still turn it off if you really wanted to, and you could also customize it for more granular control. It was a sensible thing to put in that both increased security and gave users more control over their systems.

I beta tested that service pack before it was released. I understand how important packet filtering was for the Windows platform to eliminate entire classes of attacks to which it was, until then, highly vulnerable. Pushing TPM has been a project years in the making and again will eliminate a number of different attack vectors. If you don't want to use your TPM chip, you can turn it off. Same as the firewall. There's no difference between disabling one security feature and another. You sound like you're complaining that making a security feature a requirement offends you. You can still turn it off, but most people won't, and that's the whole point.

I think you're missing the fact that you can't even install Windows 11 without having it. Anyone could use or not use the Windows Firewall.

Arnox wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 12:31 am I think you're missing the fact that you can't even install Windows 11 without having it. Anyone could use or not use the Windows Firewall.

Windows 11 can be installed on hardware without the requisite TPM chip. You would need to actively perform this install, as it is difficult to bypass in the standard install wizard.

DukeComposed wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 12:57 am Windows 11 can be installed on hardware without the requisite TPM chip. You would need to actively perform this install, as it is difficult to bypass in the standard install wizard.

Which is a barrier to a lot of tech illiterate people. Further, Microsoft plans to remove offline installs in the future, and it wouldn't surprise me if they removed the ability to install Windows without a TPM chip.

Arnox wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 1:05 am Which is a barrier to a lot of tech illiterate people.

You have to make up your mind. Either Windows is bad because new versions force people to accept new security features, or Windows is bad because sidestepping those new security features is possible but not simple enough for unskilled people who probably shouldn't be turning them off in the first place. Which is it?

Switching to Linux was hardly a "gargantuan task" for me. That was years ago now and it's only gotten easier since then. Learning to use and maintain Linux was the harder part, but no more difficult than running "defrag" and all that when I was learning Windows.

I think most ordinary desktop users don't care to "learn Linux" anyway. They point-and-click their way along and trust the OS to do what it's supposed to do "under the hood." MX-Linux and antiX do that. So do most of the popular Linux distros. For me a big "selling point" is that Linux is simpler than Windows to maintain and update.

Not that I "sell" Linux very much anymore. I kinda like being in a small minority that isn't "targeted" so much - on the desktop at least - by the evil geniuses that create malware aimed mostly at Windows machines.

Removed post because saw a possible security risk in the answers.

DukeComposed wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 1:39 am You have to make up your mind. Either Windows is bad because new versions force people to accept new security features, or Windows is bad because sidestepping those new security features is possible but not simple enough for unskilled people who probably shouldn't be turning them off in the first place. Which is it?

It should be that Microsoft should encourage but not force TPM on users. TPM on mobos would have become the standard anyway, sooner or later, so Microsoft only had to wait. They didn't need to force anything. Windows is bad because it's forcing something on users, which can only be gotten out of with some technical steps, which some users will have a hard time with, and which, Microsoft could remove at any moment.

That's the same reasoning behind the idea of not moving to Linux or at the very least trying it out for the weekend just two days, some users tell themselves it's too hard with the terminal work and having to do that hi-tech things that Linux has (sort of was decades ago), lies and misinformed advice online about Linux will never help those that already have the idea that it's too hard and that's what Windows banks on, fear of the unknown (Linux in this case) is only fear while it is unknown.

Arnox wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 9:00 pmWindows is bad because it's forcing something on users, which can only be gotten out of with some technical steps, which some users will have a hard time with, and which, Microsoft could remove at any moment.

You do realise that most of these users have no idea what TPM is all about right? They won't care about what they don't know about. Installing Linux needs technical steps too, so who will take the plunge other than some technically inclined users.

The same situation can be said about many Linux distros. It "forces" you to have certain features on or off, unless you take some technical steps to change them.

AK-47 wrote: Fri Mar 08, 2024 10:12 pm You do realise that most of these users have no idea what TPM is all about right? They won't care about what they don't know about.

They will care real quick when grandma tries to install Windows 11 onto her 4th-gen Intel pre-built and finds she now needs to spend money on a brand new PC just to run Windows 11 so she can browse the internet.

The problem is: They will just accept that their "old" hardware apparently isn't supported anymore and buy a new one. People don't care about the technical backgrounds and will just treat the unsupported hardware as defective.

At the end of the day that is probably the real reason why MS is forcing that feature in Windows 11... :/

Arnox wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:51 am They will care real quick when grandma tries to install Windows 11 onto her 4th-gen Intel pre-built and finds she now needs to spend money on a brand new PC just to run Windows 11 so she can browse the internet.

As I've said before, Microsoft would give Windows away for free at this point if they could. They have an agreement with OEMs to provide an operating system, and OEMs don't like it when they're denied an opportunity to sell new hardware. This thread has already explained the motivation for OEMs to sell more hardware, the motivation for Microsoft to promote adoption of their OS, their obligation to improve Windows security for its users, technical and non-technical, and how their security pre-requisites can be circumvented.

I don't understand where else your argument can go. Yes, Grandma's old hardware won't upgrade to Windows 11 unless she knows how to boot into rescue mode and run dism.exe. Do you want Grandma's machine to get pwned? Is that the user freedom you're arguing for here? "Because some people can disable the airbags on their cars, motor vehicle manufacturers should put a big button on the dashboard that turns off the airbags automatically, for anyone, because freedom."

Your argument supporting a firewall in XP SP2 was only because disabling it was easy, however you chose to define easy, regardless of the fact that enabling it protected hundreds of millions of users. I get the feeling you think that a firewall should be an opt-in-only security feature. Do you also want to suggest that passwords are draconian as well? Is Microsoft evil because enabling autologin for Windows 11 requires editing the registry?

If you don't like airbags, you can figure out how to shut them off in your car. If you really loathe them, you can build your own car from a kit and make sure it doesn't have them at all. But not everyone is an automotive engineer, and airbags are a beneficial safety mechanism. If the major software companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Google didn't stay vigilant in pushing better and better security postures for their users, they'd be negligent in their duties of defending their customers', and their own, best interests.

Look. I get that Windows 11 """requiring""" a minimum hardware specification is annoying. And if that spec demanded something spurious like a three-button, left-handed Guitar Hero controller I'd agree with you about it being an unnecessary improvement. But insisting that a new security feature is evil and a company that has both a financial incentive and an ethical obligation to keep a billion people safe online somehow means they are personally screwing over you and your Grandma because ha-ha-ha, we just feel like it, is so unserious an opinion that I cannot see how it deserves any merit whatsoever.

It is worth noting that Windows 10 is supported until 2025, by then the minimum hardware required to run Windows 11 would be at least 7-8 years old. Not perfect, Windows 11 would (in theory) be supported until 2031 (when the hardware turns 13 years old).

Remember Windows Vista, which required 15GB disk space and 512MB RAM? These specs were absurd back then, at least a 10-fold increase in comparison to Windows XP, which excluded many pieces of perfectly functional hardware that were only a few years old back in 2007. People stuck with Windows XP until the end of its life in 2014, now there are very few Linux distros that will run comfortably in those specs, these are "light weight" specs now.

Therefore, it is absolutely possible that Windows 10 will still be in use until its end of life in 2025.

I remember my mate with Vista when it was still in its testing stages...


There was this horrid scream that came from the attic when the thing blue-screened.

I haven't "configured" anything on this MX19KDE load since I installed it, and even then it was all a point & click operation.

Those of us who install our own OSs are a tiny sliver of the computing world. People buy a computer and run with what's presented to them. I've converted a handful of users over the years, but I was the one that did the install and initial setup of the desktop and menus and what have you. I then hand it over and tell them to give me a call if they run into a problem. I never hear back from them.

Windows became dominant when it became the default OS with the OEMs. That of course meant millions of users. Linux gains users one at a time.

uncle mark wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:15 pm Those of us who install our own OSs are a tiny sliver of the computing world. People buy a computer and run with what's presented to them.

This exact point is outlined in He Who Controls the Bootloader, an article by Scot Hacker that was published in Byte Magazine in 2001. Hacker was the designated BeOS enthusiast, and he put together what is probably the definitive story on how Microsoft works with OEMs.

"It is statistically unlikely that a person purchasing a new computer is ever going to change its operating system -- the OS that comes with the computer you buy at the local computer mega-store is probably going to be the OS you use for years, if not forever. And while it is technically trivial for a hardware vendor to set up hard drives to dual- or triple-boot multiple operating systems, very few people have the interest -- or the huevos -- to repartition their hard drives and install additional OSes after the original point of purchase. Therefore, few things could be more financially critical to an operating system vendor than to have one's product pre-installed on consumer computers."

Edit: Added link to article

uncle mark wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:15 pm
Windows became dominant when it became the default OS with the OEMs.

I highly suggest the book The Microsoft File : The Secret Case Against Bill Gates. It explains how M$ became so dominant in the PC world.
I read it in 1998 (still own it) and it made a lot of sense when the Halloween documents were getting published around the same time.

The Microsoft File is an extraordinary fly-on-the-wall account of Microsoft's intent to monopolize the computer industry. Wendy Goldman Rohm
takes you to the inner sanctum of Microsoft, has you sit in on meetings between Microsoft and important customers and competitors, and looks
at the struggles of the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice as they try to develop a strategy to counter one of the most serious
charges of market manipulation since John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil.

DukeComposed wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:50 pm This exact point is outlined in He Who Controls the Bootloader, an article by Scot Hacker that was published in Byte Magazine in 2001. Hacker was the designated BeOS enthusiast, and he put together what is probably the definitive story on how Microsoft works with OEMs.

"It is statistically unlikely that a person purchasing a new computer is ever going to change its operating system -- the OS that comes with the computer you buy at the local computer mega-store is probably going to be the OS you use for years, if not forever. And while it is technically trivial for a hardware vendor to set up hard drives to dual- or triple-boot multiple operating systems, very few people have the interest -- or the huevos -- to repartition their hard drives and install additional OSes after the original point of purchase. Therefore, few things could be more financially critical to an operating system vendor than to have one's product pre-installed on consumer computers."

Edit: Added link to article

People didn't change their OS on their PC because for the longest time, besides maybe Vista, they didn't NEED to. Even the much maligned Vista, once you had the drivers for it and installed Service Pack 1, worked well, even if it was more heavy on the system requirements than XP. Again, you guys are being ridiculously critical of Linux in a Linux forum. This is a little silly.

Arnox wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 2:22 pm People didn't change their OS on their PC because for the longest time, besides maybe Vista, they didn't NEED to.

I have no idea where you're getting that idea. Upgrading Windows has been a storied event in PC ownership since the days of Windows 1.0. Even when moving from one version of Windows to another, it could sometimes go sideways. The need to change the OS from the one the PC had the day you bought it was, as it still is today, predicated by the promise of better performance, support, and new features that the company can't or won't backport.

More fodder for thought;

Every single computer I have owned (fill in OEM here) with a pre-installed version of Windows on it (since about W95) had to be re-installed very soon after purchase due to improper file awareness. Most of the time, it was because the hardware was not identified properly, or a file was corrupt in the compressed file, and failed to expand properly, and that holds true up to today. Now when I used to build my own desktops, I loaded the OS (Thanks Comp USA or Best Buy), it always worked first time, every time. Funny thing is, I cannot explain why, so I am still mystified as to the exact cause(es) of these failures. Each was unique on it's own.

As I learned linux (starting with Ubuntu/Debian) and migrated to more peaceful distros (MX) I found that I had to be a real knucklehead to toast an install. Initial setup is a 100% understanding the structure of the file system and format your partitions properly! If we could only get over the naming conventions (which seems to turn Windows Wonks green at the gills): why is your file explorer not called "file explorer?" I think we could fair better in the explanation of why Windows is not the only OS.

Arnox wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 2:22 pm
People didn't change their OS on their PC because for the longest time, besides maybe Vista, they didn't NEED to. Even the much maligned Vista, once you had the drivers for it and installed Service Pack 1, worked well, even if it was more heavy on the system requirements than XP. Again, you guys are being ridiculously critical of Linux in a Linux forum. This is a little silly.

Vista got a bad rap because Intel talked MSFT into lowering the minimum hardware requirements so the OEMs could move a bunch of old CPUs they had on hand. On proper hardware it was a perfectly fine OS as far as Windows goes. I used it in my workplace for a number of years without issue.

I remember Vista it ran very well maybe I didn't have old cpu (didn't know about that fact) only problem was Windows Corporation kept changing the settings to their printers default settings, I made and had running printer to suit my workflow so Windows Corporation install went out the . . . and dived into Linux and Huh my settings stayed as is after many update now that's what a computer should do after all it is my computer meant to run the way I setup and not the Windows Corporation computer and here with Linux I've stayed .

needmorebrains wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 5:13 pm Every single computer I have owned (fill in OEM here) with a pre-installed version of Windows on it (since about W95) had to be re-installed very soon after purchase due to improper file awareness. Most of the time, it was because the hardware was not identified properly, or a file was corrupt in the compressed file, and failed to expand properly, and that holds true up to today.

That is highly unusual. Major OEMs like Dell, HP, Gateway, and so on don't individually install Windows on each machine. They build a base image with all the added stuff, the unhelpful "Dell(TM) Awesome Center" software pre-installed, and they add all the drivers into the image that they then have written onto the disks before they get installed. You shouldn't have driver problems with the default install of the OEM-provided OS, so if you've had bad images on literally every disk you've bought it sounds like you may be the common factor, or something happening with delivery of the machines along your mailing route, or a huge magnetic iron deposit under your house, or something. Having no machines with the pre-installed OS working correctly out of the box just seems improbable considering the volume of devices the big OEMs produce.

Drivers used to be much harder to manage in the era before you could download something like Snappy Driver Installer Origin and get really extensive device detection for all of the unique buses and ports in an obscure, one-off Dell Dimension model that was only sold to people in Nebraska and in Utah, for four months, in 2003. There were serial port drivers to worry about, LPT drivers, something called a UART. You might have separate physical cards installed in the machine for video, sound, network, and maybe even one for a joystick. It was nuts. And you couldn't always trust Windows to find its own drivers for you, which meant you kept the "Drivers" CD that came with the machine, forever, in case you needed it.

Now that pretty much every machine just has USB, HDMI, and DisplayPort ports, any conventional install of Windows or Linux is going to work on most consumer-grade machines built from ten to one or two years ago. Manufacturers aren't including as many weird devices as they used to, motherboards have more integrated onboard devices than ever, and the era of just making everything a peripheral with its own extra ISA or PCI card is over. This all makes it far less terrifying these days than it used to be to wipe the hard disk and replace the OS on a new machine.

Arnox wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 2:22 pmPeople didn't change their OS on their PC because for the longest time, besides maybe Vista, they didn't NEED to. Even the much maligned Vista, once you had the drivers for it and installed Service Pack 1, worked well, even if it was more heavy on the system requirements than XP.

The same will apply for Windows 11. People won't change the OS because they don't NEED to, unless they don't like its invasive features. In many cases, they won't have much choice, as Linux cannot readily support all hardware or run the programs that Windows can out of the box.

Arnox wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 2:22 pmAgain, you guys are being ridiculously critical of Linux in a Linux forum. This is a little silly.

Where has anyone on this thread been ridiculously critical of Linux? This isn't about "Linux sucks", but what will happen when Windows 10 goes end of life. As a dev I can say there are a lot of sucky things about both operating systems (eg. Linux case-sensitive file system and use of magic numbers rather than extensions, and Windows requiring activation and having a piece of hell known as the Registry). But that's not what this thread is about, and I don't know anyone who has been ridiculously critical of Linux in this thread.

DukeComposed wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 6:56 pmThat is highly unusual. Major OEMs like Dell, HP, Gateway, and so on don't individually install Windows on each machine. They build a base image with all the added stuff, the unhelpful "Dell(TM) Awesome Center" software pre-installed, and they add all the drivers into the image that they then have written onto the disks before they get installed.

The best OEM images I have come across are the ones from Panasonic for their Toughbooks, with no crapware, but useful tools (such as the PC Information Viewer, which is a lot like our QSI utility).

DukeComposed wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 6:56 pmDrivers used to be much harder to manage in the era before you could download something like ... and get really extensive device detection for all of the unique buses and ports in an obscure, one-off Dell Dimension model that was only sold to people in Nebraska and in Utah, for four months, in 2003.

And even back then, it was still easier than installing drivers on Linux.

AK-47 wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 9:46 pm as Linux cannot readily support all hardware or run the programs that Windows can out of the box.

With a little effort it's easy enough to find out if the hardware, cpu's or anything else will work on Linux, yeah nah oh that's why Win users usually stay as Win users, Yawn ohh that that's effort and what's the point Windows is good enough they say, that's neighbors and people I know.

No-one has to wait the long times as in the past to use latest Intel these days the say Intel gen14 with ARC graphics within 3 months of release on Linux it's ready to roll.

AK-47 wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 9:46 pm The best OEM images I have come across are the ones from Panasonic for their Toughbooks, with no crapware, but useful tools (such as the PC Information Viewer, which is a lot like our QSI utility).

Toughbooks are amazing little machines. I once wound up on a consulting team who had a client contact us with some Windows-based Toughbooks, and they wanted to know if they could convert them to Linux.

You know what's tough? Old stuff that's had its tires kicked a whole bunch.

So all of the Panasonic Toughbook hardware was pretty old, compared to the comparable laptops of the day. Putting Red Hat on a Toughbook was going to be easy.

Except for the screen.

The Toughbook graphics driver was proprietary and, after some research, the one company who had a Linux driver for Toughbooks was very princess-and-the-pea about it. Their Linux driver was closed-source and invitation only. We asked about licensing it from them. They asked why. We said we were interested in customizing a Linux distro for a Toughbook for limited usage and testing, which was true.

They wrote back something like "Hmmmm, sounds suspicious. Thanks but no thanks."

I hope that Toughbooks have an open source graphics driver by now.

@DukeComposed I presume they thought you were terrorists because you wanted to get the graphics driver to work on Linux?
Now a days they use the Intel HD graphics so no issue with Linux graphics on these units. The backlight may need some extra config (depending on the unit) to get it to work but that's about it.

AK-47 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:19 am @DukeComposed I presume they thought you were terrorists because you wanted to get the graphics driver to work on Linux?
Now a days they use the Intel HD graphics so no issue with Linux graphics on these units. The backlight may need some extra config (depending on the unit) to get it to work but that's about it.

The company, allegedly, already had a functional Linux graphics driver for Toughbooks. They just didn't like sharing it. I don't remember the details exactly. I think they had a stipulation on their website that they offered their driver to specific inquiries on a case-by-base basis and refused any reselling of their software. Since we were consultants, I think technically selling or leasing their driver to us on behalf of a customer could be seen as reselling it.

Regardless of the fact we were only asking on behalf of our client and had no intentions of duplicating our work for anyone else, the driver company felt spooked and declined to work with us.

I had, for the project, a Toughbook I could use as a reference. They're neat little machines. Almost literally bulletproof. But after that negative experience with a pissy driver vendor, I never bought one for myself and, unless I see proof of an incredible Linux-only experience on one, I doubt I ever will.

DukeComposed wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 6:56 pm

needmorebrains wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 5:13 pm Every single computer I have owned (fill in OEM here) with a pre-installed version of Windows on it (since about W95) had to be re-installed very soon after purchase due to improper file awareness. Most of the time, it was because the hardware was not identified properly, or a file was corrupt in the compressed file, and failed to expand properly, and that holds true up to today.

That is highly unusual. Major OEMs like Dell, HP, Gateway, and so on don't individually install Windows on each machine. They build a base image with all the added stuff, the unhelpful "Dell(TM) Awesome Center" software pre-installed, and they add all the drivers into the image that they then have written onto the disks before they get installed. You shouldn't have driver problems with the default install of the OEM-provided OS, so if you've had bad images on literally every disk you've bought it sounds like you may be the common factor, or something happening with delivery of the machines along your mailing route, or a huge magnetic iron deposit under your house, or something. Having no machines with the pre-installed OS working correctly out of the box just seems improbable considering the volume of devices the big OEMs produce.

Drivers used to be much harder to manage in the era before you could download something like Snappy Driver Installer Origin and get really extensive device detection for all of the unique buses and ports in an obscure, one-off Dell Dimension model that was only sold to people in Nebraska and in Utah, for four months, in 2003. There were serial port drivers to worry about, LPT drivers, something called a UART. You might have separate physical cards installed in the machine for video, sound, network, and maybe even one for a joystick. It was nuts. And you couldn't always trust Windows to find its own drivers for you, which meant you kept the "Drivers" CD that came with the machine, forever, in case you needed it.

Now that pretty much every machine just has USB, HDMI, and DisplayPort ports, any conventional install of Windows or Linux is going to work on most consumer-grade machines built from ten to one or two years ago. Manufacturers aren't including as many weird devices as they used to, motherboards have more integrated onboard devices than ever, and the era of just making everything a peripheral with its own extra ISA or PCI card is over. This all makes it far less terrifying these days than it used to be to wipe the hard disk and replace the OS on a new machine.

Yes, and now that I give it more thought, it may have been more a me thing than an it thing. I was really hot on the AMD and ATI (was that a thing?) back in the day. Not so much now. Anyway, if memory serves, there was a real disconnect back then with the ATI graphics drivers (lots of warnings from MS about the driver not being signed by MS or not designed for the hardware, even though ATI/AMD could verify it was authentic) and the OS. So that was in most cases an issue.

The rest of the failures were hard file failures, and in most cases, a SFC scan would put the system right, or not. (SFC scan, bad system files, repaired, reboot, scan again, still bad files, re-install the OS then finally stable). I can't explain it any better than that. Was a motivating factor in exploring other OS replacements (MX). I do have to say the issues were never terminal or machine-bricking. And in one case it was a bad cable (ISA) to the hard drive (One pin!) Ouch. That one took 3 days to figure out!

We are all having a great discussion, and I just wanted to thank everyone for their honest inputs. It does lend perspective to the original question. We are a real talented bunch here, each of us in our own way!

Sorry for the really late response. Got super busy IRL and couldn't answer at the time.

DukeComposed wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:04 pm I have no idea where you're getting that idea. Upgrading Windows has been a storied event in PC ownership since the days of Windows 1.0. Even when moving from one version of Windows to another, it could sometimes go sideways. The need to change the OS from the one the PC had the day you bought it was, as it still is today, predicated by the promise of better performance, support, and new features that the company can't or won't backport.

I'm not saying that people didn't upgrade. Of course they did. But they weren't forced to upgrade due to security concerns. (Or at very least, due to MANY security concerns.) This meant an old PC with an old OS could be used in enterprise for much longer as long as the hardware and software didn't suddenly break.

AK-47 wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 9:46 pm The same will apply for Windows 11. People won't change the OS because they don't NEED to, unless they don't like its invasive features. In many cases, they won't have much choice, as Linux cannot readily support all hardware or run the programs that Windows can out of the box.

Linux may not support every single piece of hardware in the world, but Linux still covers a LOT of hardware, and just about everything most consumers and even enterprises will care about. Furthermore, I've had seen many instances where Linux driver support was actually even BETTER than on Windows. But putting all that aside, the case for Linux adoption is quite strong. As more and more viable software for Linux pops up, people will have more and more incentive to switch over.

DukeComposed wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:01 am The Toughbook graphics driver was proprietary and, after some research, the one company who had a Linux driver for Toughbooks was very princess-and-the-pea about it. Their Linux driver was closed-source and invitation only. We asked about licensing it from them. They asked why. We said we were interested in customizing a Linux distro for a Toughbook for limited usage and testing, which was true.

They wrote back something like "Hmmmm, sounds suspicious. Thanks but no thanks."

I hope that Toughbooks have an open source graphics driver by now.

Holy hell...

Never buying a Toughbook now until I see this resolved. That is unacceptable.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 1:25 am Sorry for the really late response. Got super busy IRL and couldn't answer at the time.

DukeComposed wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:04 pm I have no idea where you're getting that idea. Upgrading Windows has been a storied event in PC ownership since the days of Windows 1.0. Even when moving from one version of Windows to another, it could sometimes go sideways. The need to change the OS from the one the PC had the day you bought it was, as it still is today, predicated by the promise of better performance, support, and new features that the company can't or won't backport.

I'm not saying that people didn't upgrade. Of course they did. But they weren't forced to upgrade due to security concerns. (Or at very least, due to MANY security concerns.) This meant an old PC with an old OS could be used in enterprise for much longer as long as the hardware and software didn't suddenly break.

People were forced to upgrade as security updates were discontinued for old versions of the software. I don't know how you measure "MANY security concerns" but even one month without a Microsoft security update can be catastrophic. Companies with enterprise deployments almost entirely insist on current security patches, not the other way around. Old PCs with an old OS are vulnerable to who knows what, unless you pay enough to receive an extended support contract, as some companies and governments do.

What you're describing isn't enterprise longevity, it's corporate malfeasance.

DukeComposed wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 2:13 am People were forced to upgrade as security updates were discontinued for old versions of the software. I don't know how you measure "MANY security concerns" but even one month without a Microsoft security update can be catastrophic. Companies with enterprise deployments almost entirely insist on current security patches, not the other way around. Old PCs with an old OS are vulnerable to who knows what, unless you pay enough to receive an extended support contract, as some companies and governments do.

What you're describing isn't enterprise longevity, it's corporate malfeasance.

What? I'm not talking about anything past like, say, 2001. The public internet was definitely gaining steam in the 90s, but it wasn't entirely the norm yet, and totally offline systems and networks were a very common thing still. That's why back then, you weren't forced nearly as much to upgrade, even on the enterprise level.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 1:25 amI'm not saying that people didn't upgrade. Of course they did. But they weren't forced to upgrade due to security concerns. (Or at very least, due to MANY security concerns.) This meant an old PC with an old OS could be used in enterprise for much longer as long as the hardware and software didn't suddenly break.

Pretty much every single time an older version of Windows goes end-of-life, there are security concerns for remaining on the older version of Windows which will no longer receive security updates. Same goes for MacOS, Linux, and any other OS you can think of. This is more of an angle in corporate sectors where liability is an important thing to establish in the case of a breach.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 1:25 amLinux may not support every single piece of hardware in the world, but Linux still covers a LOT of hardware, and just about everything most consumers and even enterprises will care about. Furthermore, I've had seen many instances where Linux driver support was actually even BETTER than on Windows. But putting all that aside, the case for Linux adoption is quite strong. As more and more viable software for Linux pops up, people will have more and more incentive to switch over.

The only time I have seen Linux support hardware better than Windows, is an old 25 year old webcam that no longer runs on recent versions of Windows. Other than that, the plague of obsoleting hardware is now affecting Linux too, serves them right for stuffing all the device drivers in the kernel and not having an easy way to load modules from elsewhere.
About applications, very few want to port an app to Linux without specifying an exact distro and version due to the absolute disregard for backwards compatibility. You could argue whether such disregard is a good or bad thing, but reality is, it puts application developers off.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 1:25 amHoly hell...

Never buying a Toughbook now until I see this resolved. That is unacceptable.

I have some CF-19, CF-30, CF-31 Toughbooks and Linux is OK, though the CF-31 Linux starts the audio device muted (fixed by alsaunmute on Fedora). Graphics are Intel HD graphics. I'm not sure what model @DukeComposed attempted to use so I can't comment on that, nor can I comment on the ones that are kitted with the optional second GPU (which I believe is an AMD or NVIDIA one in most cases).

I have yet to try the new FZ-40 toughbook, I am still fishing around to see if any secure boot stuff would cause issues before investing anything into it.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 7:09 am What? I'm not talking about anything past like, say, 2001.

Arnox wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2024 2:22 pm People didn't change their OS on their PC because for the longest time, besides maybe Vista, they didn't NEED to.

So no computer ever needed security and feature updates before Windows XP, except for six years later when the first OS replacement for XP was made available, and then nothing since. Got it.

Posting from one <ebay> now. Cost was 71 bucks with free shipping. 256 GB ssd with Windows 10. Yanked it out. Inserted 1 TB SSD replacement SSD.
Dual boots MX Fluxbox 23.1 and AntiX 23.1 runit Full .
Battery sucked <dead>. Ordered 9 cell for 20 bucks. Have a old T430 battery in here presently that holds a charge for about 50 minutes
Added ram .DDr3 I had extra.
I stayed under my 100 dollar limit when it comes to computer gear. The ram and TB hard drive came out of broken gear. Just sitting on the shelf. Doing nada.
Used to get these things cheaper months ago.
Like a Samsung EOL Stumpy Chromebox only used to build chrome apps supposedly for 12 bucks < working>.
Have one of those on the shelf also.
Cheaper than a PI setup once I jumper out the bios pins and do the Mr. Chromebox install.

DukeComposed wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 12:51 pm So no computer ever needed security and feature updates before Windows XP

Ok, man... You need to work on your reading comprehension. I didn't say PCs NEVER ever needed to update. I said that it was a lot LESS important due to the fact that there were a lot more offline and isolated systems back then. Obviously as long as the internet was around, there were exceptions. Stop taking one phrase of my post and then pulling it completely out of the rest of the context.

Arnox wrote: Wed Mar 13, 2024 10:45 pm I didn't say PCs NEVER ever needed to update. I said that it was a lot LESS important due to the fact that there were a lot more offline and isolated systems back then.

No, you're totally right. I see what you're saying now. Computers were much more secure back in the era when you stuck them in the corner of the room and they only ran software you fed them from safe, secure floppy diskettes. Windows is bad because Microsoft allowed the Internet to happen circa 1995, which, of course, is before Windows XP, which you and I both agree is The Last Good Operating System.

Certainly, viruses never propagated through any other means before TCP/IP became commonplace. Thanks for clearing that up.