this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2025
72 points (86.7% liked)

Linux

8908 readers
371 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ategon@programming.dev
anzo@programming.dev
dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev
72
What problems does Linux have to overcome to get more users (programming.dev)
submitted 4 days ago by cm0002@programming.dev to c/linux@programming.dev
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Games on Linux are great now this is why I fully moved to Linux. Is the the work place Pc's market improving.

OQB @RavenofDespair@lemmy.ml

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 10 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Linux distros typically have 2-3 different ways to install applications and multiple mechanisms for updating/maintaining,

Windows ways to install applications:

  • hunt down an installer either exe or msi file, or a zip which you unextract somewhere which doesn't then create desktop icons and then scattered all aroundu
  • Windows store, just like any other application store by MacOS or Linux only shit
  • Winget, cli installer just like under Linux but actually decent
  • chocolatey, aaaah just stop!

On windows, they have a registration scheme where installers log to a common OS level application management on what to run to uninstall.

Yup sounds absolute reasonable... Wtf?

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Right but in practice nobody really uses the Windows store, and winget, chocolatey etc. are only used by geeks. For normal users it's always

  1. Download .exe or .msi
  2. Double click it.
  3. Follow the instructions.

On Linux you have:

  1. apt, dnf, etc. - pretty reliable but only really work from the command line (I have yet to use a "friendly" store frontend that actually works well), and you almost always get an outdated version of the software.
  2. Snap or Flatpak - the idea is there, but again I have yet to actually use one of these successfully. They always have issues with GUI styling (e.g. icons not working), or permissions, or integration or something.
  3. Compiling from source - no Windows software requires this but it's not uncommon on Linux.

Also it's relatively common for Linux software not to bundle its dependencies. I work for a company that makes commercial Linux software and they bundle Python (yes it's bad), but that depends on libffi and they don't bundle that. So it only works on distros that happen to have the specific ABI version of libffi that it requires. And you have to install it yourself. This is obviously dumb but it's the sort of thing you have to deal with on Linux that is simply never an issue on Windows or Mac.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Dependencies only become an issue if you don't distribute your source (allowing distros or individuals to compile against the shared libraries they actually have installed, and patch out minor compatibility issues). Since closed-source is frowned upon in the Linux world, it's unsurprising that there are various sorts of pressure to Not Do That.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 3 points 4 days ago

Since closed-source is frowned upon in the Linux world

Indeed, this is a root cause of the problem. But it is a problem. The Linux community needs to get off its high horse and make distribution of binary programs (which may or may not be open source) work properly.

Snap and Flatpak are definitely a step in the right direction at least.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org -3 points 4 days ago

Right but in practice nobody really uses the Windows store, and winget, chocolatey etc. are only used by geeks.

ok.

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

On windows, they have a registration scheme where installers log to a common OS level application management on what to run to uninstall.

Yup sounds absolute reasonable… Wtf?

What’s wrong with that? When I was cleaning out Windows recently, I was happy that I didn’t have to hunt down uninstall scripts in every program directory I wanted to remove.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Maybe I'm a bit jaded as I remember the time where windows application didn't even came with a basic uninstaller and didn't relied on InstallShield instead used their own installer.

Also I don't think that there is actually such log, and that "OS level application management" is just the good old "Programs and Features" dialog where it simply registers the path to the uninstaller.

On Linux on the other hand the applications place their stuff in well defined directories and the install script has to deliver the file manifest (and where to copy its content) otherwise the application or library would simply not work. Flatpak kinda does the same but uses a dedicated directory in the users home directory, Snaps uuhm I don't touch canonical stuff with a ten foot pole, AppImage just delete the file and your are golden.

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

“OS level application management” is just the good old “Programs and Features” dialog where it simply registers the path to the uninstaller.

That’s what I took that to mean, too. And it’s sufficient. It allows the OS to provide a single point from which to uninstall all programs.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That’s what I took that to mean, too. And it’s sufficient. It allows the OS to provide a single point from which to uninstall all programs.

Well then, when that's sufficient. Have you checked %AppData% (Local, Roaming, LocalLow) for any residue?

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago

What I meant is that the “registering with the OS” part is sufficient. If the uninstallers suck, no operating system can do anything about that.