Recently helped a couple of people who would benefit - financially and functionally - from switching but they’ve said - and I quote - “I don’t want to learn a whole new operating system”.
For a lot of people, Windows was their first ever OS and they not only had to learn to use an OS but how to use a computer at all. Therefore they think of switching as starting from scratch - “a whole new …” implying “it will be a lot to learn”. And yet there are many Win-native switchers on Reddit threads (especially Mint) who were dubious at first and yet they are loving it and saying how easy it was to get going.
Many Win-natives have forgotten how much they had to re-learn when moving up Win versions. Many of them get nostalgic about older Win versions. Maybe this is a key to overcoming some of the fear - highlighting how Linux distros like Mint and MX will give you the simple start menu and taskbar that you liked, and how Linux can be customised to fit their preferences.
Of course there will be hiccups for people with actual (real-not-imagined) Win-specific needs but there are many, many more for whom internet, email, saving/printing files and basic office suite software will suffice.
Think that is the best move and its why I only offer mint as it looks so close, even things in same place. Its trying to jump ship to something totally different, yes even ubuntu with menu top left and funny coloured backgrounds put people off and we have not gone into the more difficult arch or similar
I don’t think I’ll live long enough to see “The Year of the Linux Desktop” - and I’ve mentioned before - I don’t really care… I would like to see it reach the market penetration of MacOS - but not to eclipse or get close to Windows… Just enough to convince the likes of Adobe to port their apps to Linux…
I acknowledged earlier the fact that the user interface of Linux has vastly improved, making it much easier for Windows users to make the switch. However there are times when using the terminal is needed and that’s what might be intimidating for someone.
Relative to CAD options, I should explain that I have a vast experience with CAD. I have worked and taught in the engineering design industry for 45 years of my working life. I started using CAD with AutoCAD version 1.0 circa early to mid 1980’s and several years later started using Microstation (which I much prefer to AutoCAD).
You can be rest assured that I am not Autodesk “fan boy” BUT the advanced capabilities (eg AutoLISP, smart blocks, etc) are important to me. I found a great software package, ProgeCAD, that is totally compatible with AutoCAD, and meets all my needs but to my dismay it isn’t available for Linux and does not run with Wine.
The vast array of free CAD programs are hobbiest level, and probably serve many user’s needs but they are not professional level programs.
My whole point in my original post was that some Windows users might not be lazy but are held hostage because they have an absolute need for software that cannot be run on Linux.
That is a valid point, and when you use such software you tend to live inside it and rarely even see Windows.
I have tried R in Windows… it is no different to R in Linux… because you stay inside R and never see the OS. I bet AutoCAD is like that. Using it in Linux would make no difference to your experience.
The times when you start to feel he presence of an OS are, as you say, at the CLI, and doing communications. Exchanging files with another system can be difficult.
One of the arguments for using linux in the scientific world used to be that Linux ( or BSD) can address large amounts of memory. That is important for programs that manipulate large matrices. Win used to be limited to addressing 16Gb of ram… at least the Home edition… I believe that restriction has been removed, but I do not know what the current address space limit is for Win. ?
Does AutoCAD tend to run out of memory?
At one big UNIX shop I worked at - some of the engineers there used Microstation on HP-UX RISC workstations… Windows NT was only just emerging as a “workstation” O/s - prior to that - “workstation” almost universally referred to something running UNIX, e.g. DG-UX, IRIX, HP-UX, Digital UNIX, AIX, Sun Sparc / SunOS / Solaris…
Was Autocad ever ported to UNIX? I don’t recall it…
At that same UNIX “shop” - they ran both Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Premiere for UNIX (for Silicon Graphics IRIX).
" The first version by Autodesk was demonstrated at the 1982 Comdex and released that December. AutoCAD supported CP/M-80 computers.[11] As Autodesk’s flagship product, by March 1986 AutoCAD had become the most ubiquitous CAD program worldwide.[12] The first UNIX version was Release 10 for Xenix in October 1989, while the first version for Windows was Release 12, released in February 1993."
That is from Wikipedia.
Strange that they would give up on Unix.
Do they work on big local offline dataset?
Maybe I should have considered that option…
Anyway, the VM concept works great, my wife feels like in the real office, except it’s me who brews the coffee
I used to work with big data, too much for one sheet of excel desktop version so had to run several sheets to make it fit then extract relevant to another. Some days I set it running, went to the gym and on return it had not always finished. And except for disk light flashing had no idea if it was working or not. With internet connection not sure I would know more.
Those days are behind me, now google sheets is enough to run our small member data on 400 lines.
Not for me.
There’s a whole IT department at her employer. They (together with the accountant team) made those Excel tricks with those datasets and pivots and slicers etc.
Now I don’t even try to understand, she tried to explain to me, what those lines mean, bills, numbers of invoices, economical events, etc, but after 30 seconds I just heared some sea rumble. Accountants mostly speak a different language.
I refuse to install Windows on bare metal, but it works now enclosed in that VM.
If something fails to work, I (and “my Linux”) can’t be blamed. So this is kind of a key to the peace and happiness
Regarding performance, according to my wife, on my desktop (i7-8700 / 32GB RAM) the VM with 6 virtual CPU’s and 12GB assigned runs slightly faster than the real computer on bare metal at her real office.
Windows users are often difficult to convert to Linux due to familiarity, software compatibility, gaming support, and resistance to changing long-used workflows.
In what way(s) do you mean “compares”? There’s a myriad of ways this can be interpreted. Could you be more specific? Could you mention which distributions you tried?
Thats like saying a mac against an android tablet …
Oranges and bananes…
On all of them you can surf the net, do your emails write the odd letter… so they are all the same 90% Of the population only use 10 % of the functions. And if they are using an such as writer, word, pages. They only again use 10 % of its power.
I reckon that is why people are reluctant to convert. … all they would get is the same functions.
All OS’s tend to converge toward the same functions with minimal differences in presentation.
That has nothing to do with the quote “why”!!! For most die-hard Windows users, Linux has no appeal, what-so-ever.
For myself, I like and use Windows!!!
I now have W11 Pro running on my Asus mobo via Flyby11!!!
Since W11 has no issues with my Nvidia GT430, unlike most Linux, I will try a dual-boot with Gentoo or a Gentoo VM!!
Appeal is a different thing to function.
Apart from your nvidia card issue, both Win and Linux will perform all mthe same functions. From a materialistic point of view they are the same. It is only when you come to how do they make you feel that there are big differences.
Some people choose Linux for spiritual/philosophical/moral reasons. That is a different thing again. Not wanting to support proprietary software is a valid point of view too. Some people will support Open Source even when it is functionally inferior.
