• TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m sorry, but the “fragmentation” of Linux distros and the number of ways to install a program on Linux are also issues.

    On Linux (or at least Ubuntu), you have to manage sources to install some programs, and that is WAY too complex for an end user. Fine, you can always use the CLI or search online, but then you run into fragmentation issues. “Why is there no Ubuntu download? Do I click the RPM one?”

    On Windows, yes, it’s more clicks on average, but it’s a very consistent experience across all programs. You either open up the Microsoft Store, or you Google the name of the program you want and hit “next” until it’s done. No managing sources and no deciding which file extension you need. The only issue would be deciding between 32 bit and 64 bit.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, you search the store, pick the app, press install. The end user doesn’t care or know whether the package manager is installing a flatpak or an RPM.

      It’s not like people installing Windows programs need to know whether the installer is an .exe or an .MSI file, they just know that pressing the installer they downloaded brings up an installer. They don’t need to know about the low-level packaging fundamentals.

      It’s not just more clicks on average, it’s more confusion, more prone to installing non-genuine software, and still fragmented. Do I install 32 bit? 64? Arm32? Arm64?

      As for there are too many ways to install a program, what nonsense is that? You’re not made to open the terminal, just as you are not made to open powershell and use Winget. You can literally use this exact same argument against windows, yet you aren’t.

      Look at the pictures I linked to. One is far easier than the other, and Windows isn’t the easy one.