I'm a hardcore Linux user, but this is a simplistic vision.
Ubuntu still runs a broken Bluetooth stack by default (and they've ignored the reports). HiDPI/multimonitor support seems to be insufficient (based on reports; I don't suffer from it), and there is a sadly realistic long list of issues¹. To say that "Linux has all the utilities you will ever need" is false for a non negligible amount of users; some unique programs are not available on Linux (even Office documents can't be fully handled on Linux with 100% confidence of compatibility).
With that in mind, I personally think that Linux is mature enough for light users (browsing and non-professional Office usage), which I suppose are a significant amount of the userbase.
There are so many lies and exaggerations both about Linux and Windows in this article it's simply staggering. Looks like it was written with people who understand nothing about computers in mind.
I have been using Linux as my primary OS for years now, and while it does 99% of what I need, there’s still the 1% that requires me to have dual boot.
Photoshop and another art software (Clip Studio Paint, for example) require Windows (or a Mac). I could probably get away with using Krita instead (and I do use it on Windows as well) but my drawing tablet (Huion display tablet) doesn’t work on Linux. Somebody wrote a set of scripts for it and it kinda works but you loose some functionality.
There is also the guitar amp & fx modeling software, plus a bunch of other audio softwares that may or may not have a counterpart on Linux. And I did try Wine with mixed results.
So, if you’re just browsing the internet or doing software development, you’re probably good and can migrate, otherwise, that article is maybe too miopic.
Nope. It's not gonna happen. My wife works for a non-profit where many of its members are in their 50s, 60, 70s and even 80s. They can barely run Windows - and they've been working with Windows for decades. To be fair, there are a few who are quite savvy, however most are not.
Meanwhile we have CS professors lamenting that the incoming CS students don't know basic computer concepts - like what is a file system? They've been raised on tablets. My takeaway is those under 20 aren't going to be running Linux, either.
That leaves those aged 20-50 remaining. Well, you can pretty much write off those aged 30-50. They're dealing with the classic squeeze - taking care of children on the one hand and taking care of aging parents on the other. They simply don't have time to mess around with something like Linux. They're going to keep using whatever they've been using because it works and they're looking to keep things simple as they struggle with all their family responsibilities.
That leaves those in their 20s. The good news is they have financial limitations so Linux is attractive from that point. The bad news is they're the most susceptible to marketing and branding and Linux just isn't cool (unless you're an über geek).
In other words, the majority of everybody who's ever going to be running Linux on their desktop are already running Linux on their desktop.
I've started the slow move across. Im using a debian installation on an old laptop to start learning how to use it. How do deal with any of the problems that people usually encouter when using Linux, such at internet, printing, sound. The Proton project at Steam is making Linux gaming a far more viable option, and most of my entertainment options are web based streaming. Its not going to be easy and its comfortable just to go to windows 11, but I dont trust Microsoft not to try and force people to go through their store to install all software because "security". 5 years from now I want to be in a postion where Im stuck in the MS ecosystem, having to pay MS prices and having MS determine what I can or cant use or what media I can or cant consume. All whilst monitoring everything I do.
If I'm in the market to buy a laptop, I wouldn't be able to find a single decent laptop running a Linux. I would have to pay windows that I have no intention of using AND hope that it supports, which I can know for sure only after installing Linux.
Samsung laptops that run Chrome OS look neat but Chrome OS is too restrictive, it doesn't feel like Linux even after their new _run Linux apps on a container_ thing.
I am not sure why IBM/Intel which have vested interests in Linux don't make Laptops that run Linux. Is the market not big enough?
They don't have a consumer division but many of these OSS projects that constitute Linux desktop have/had significant contributions from IBM/Redhat engineers..
and for a company that badly needs to repair a brand, consumer devices are the best option IMHO.
Again, IBM was only an example that came to my mind. I'm sure there are other companies that would benefit from making a Linux laptop.
Windows 11 is the perfect time to switch to Linux (especially for first-timers), using WSL2. Then, once you're familiar with Linux, it's a shorter jump to replace Windows completely (and appreciate how fast Linux can be without WSL)
Ubuntu still runs a broken Bluetooth stack by default (and they've ignored the reports). HiDPI/multimonitor support seems to be insufficient (based on reports; I don't suffer from it), and there is a sadly realistic long list of issues¹. To say that "Linux has all the utilities you will ever need" is false for a non negligible amount of users; some unique programs are not available on Linux (even Office documents can't be fully handled on Linux with 100% confidence of compatibility).
With that in mind, I personally think that Linux is mature enough for light users (browsing and non-professional Office usage), which I suppose are a significant amount of the userbase.
¹=https://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.t...