The issue is that open source distributions don't have access to the level of testing and quality control that the proprietary desktop duopoly do. Microsoft and Apple can spend millions of dollars to make it very unlikely that a system update will break your system. And even if when it breaks, there is such a large user base that a solution will usually be easy to find.
Linux ditros don't have that. In my experience, Ubuntu and Fedora don't have that level of stability especially when running a heavy desktop like Gnome or KDE. My Arch laptop very stable, but I'm running a minimalist desktop. In the rare occasions where something goes wrong I have the experience and inclination to quickly learn to fix it.
I wish there were more competition in the commercial space, but I'm not sure that it's even a good idea for open source to try to match the GUI administration utilities from the proprietary OS's. It's far too much work troubleshooting weird corner cases. I wholeheartedly recommend Linux or open source for people who want the level of control over their machines that open source allows. But for people who just want their machine to work, it's reasonable to cede control to Apple or Microsoft.
Maybe PopOS, with it's backing from a commercial vendor on limited hardware will change this.
> The issue is that open source distributions don't have access to the level of testing and quality control that the proprietary desktop duopoly do.
In the case of Windows, there's a lot of onus on the OEM. Of course, most OEMs will not test Linux at all, so either you find a vendor that supports Linux or you YOLO it. Of course, if you YOLO, you're so helping ensure the market continues to make _more_ Windows-only hardware, so you can look forward to even more YOLO.
> I wish there were more competition in the commercial space,
Unlike in previous decades*, you actually can buy laptops with Linux pre-installed, from vendors that actually support it. This is huge.
If you want Linux that Just Works, for the love of God, stop buying Windows hardware. Sometimes I think the smartest thing Apple ever did was require Apple hardware to run OSX.
Searching Linux update bricking systems brought up nothing relevant. The closest I could find was a forum post by a user complaining about the update bricking their “experimental system”.
The Macos examples are particularly bad. Bricking systems with logic boards replaced by Apple repair and because you connected to “unauthorized” USB devices.
Literally the first time I installed Ubuntu in 2009, I booted into it, it asked me to install a bunch of updates, and when I did the required reboot, it dropped me into the boot terminal with a bunch of vague errors.
You have not heard of it? Well, you're replying to someone who's using Arch. With Arch, you get into trouble all the time, but if you're well versed with Linux (and Arch) you can fix it.
I'm using Arch, and ZFS, on my work laptop. A month ago, when I update my kernel, boom I had to use Systemrescue because it would no longer boot ZFS root. And of course just at that day I lost my Ventoy USB stick (probably my 2 y.o. son got rid of it ...)
Linux ditros don't have that. In my experience, Ubuntu and Fedora don't have that level of stability especially when running a heavy desktop like Gnome or KDE. My Arch laptop very stable, but I'm running a minimalist desktop. In the rare occasions where something goes wrong I have the experience and inclination to quickly learn to fix it.
I wish there were more competition in the commercial space, but I'm not sure that it's even a good idea for open source to try to match the GUI administration utilities from the proprietary OS's. It's far too much work troubleshooting weird corner cases. I wholeheartedly recommend Linux or open source for people who want the level of control over their machines that open source allows. But for people who just want their machine to work, it's reasonable to cede control to Apple or Microsoft.
Maybe PopOS, with it's backing from a commercial vendor on limited hardware will change this.