Linux

10226 readers

1018 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

165

Linux comes for Windows at 40 — and gaming can't save it (www.makeuseof.com)

submitted 15 hours ago by cm0002@no.lastname.nz to c/linux@programming.dev

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

To not much official fanfare on Thursday, the Windows operating system turned 40 years old, marking four decades since Windows 1.0 debuted in the United States on November 20, 1985. Its midlife milestone comes with a crisis, though. Diehard Windows users are switching to Linux for a variety of reasons.

For one, gaming is finally better on Linux machines, which makes the moat Windows dug for itself a little more passable. Add to that the end of support for Windows 10 in October, the growing frustration among power users about Microsoft Recall, and the growing number of polarizing features, and power users are finding plenty of reasons to make the switch to Linux.

It's unclear if the wave of Windows power users loudly moving to Linux has crested yet, or if this is just the beginning. That said, the past year has seen a flood of articles like this one, scores of posts on Reddit, and YouTube videos documenting and occasionally evangelizing the conversion to Linux.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] djdarren@piefed.social 7 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I would suggest that the vast, vast majority of companies that use Windows do so for two reasons

1: Because the software is (mostly) interchangeable with what their customers use. Office docs can be opened in any Office application without any formatting errors. Generally speaking. Open an .odt in Word and it could (will probably) end up buggering up the formatting.

2: Because most business owners don't want to go to the expense of hiring a dedicated IT guy to manage a bunch of computers that their staff don't know how to operate.

[–] Rooster326@programming.dev 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Because most business owners don't want to go to the expense of hiring a dedicated IT guy to manage a bunch of computers that their staff don't know how to operate.

Most businesses already have a "dedicated IT guy to manage a bunch of computers that their staff don't know how to operate."

And the computers are Windows!

People have been using windows for 40 years and most still are not good at it.

That will never change.

[–] djdarren@piefed.social 2 points 1 hour ago

Do they really though?

The company I work for has 150 employees. Granted, most of those are across various departments in the worlshop, so don't use computers as part of their core work, but we have around 50 PCs around the site.

We don't have a dedicated IT person. We should, but we don't (currently), because our boss is the kind of old skool employer who doesn't really understand why we need that many computers when they didn't have them back in the '70S. I would suggest that there are far more mid sized businesses like that where the boomer owner holds a similar view than you might think. Or I'm wrong and just looking at it through my particular lens. But having worked for a bunch of mid sized engineering firms over the years, little about my current employer strikes me as particularly different from the others.

[–] poinck@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Regarding 2: That is actually part of my job. 95% Windows, the rest is MacOS and maybe 3 to 5 Linux users (myself excluded).