Linux Is Only Free if You Don’t Value Your Time
This one is my favorite.
My co-workers SSD failed, and he was out most of the day. My SSD failed, and I was back up and running in about 10 minutes.
If the user sees the following
Linux Is Only Free if You Don’t Value Your Time
one must immediately counter with
Windows Is Only Free if You Don’t Value Your Privacy
The Windows user will immediately disintegrate if performed optimally
One Common Linux Myth You Should Stop Believing: there’s a FOSS alternative to every single proprietary software out there that can be used as a replacement in all and every use case.
I mean a lot of them are ok but it depends on what you are doing. Gimp can make memes but if you learned Adobe you are going to struggle.
I think half of it is people doing want to learn something new and half of it is that the tools are behind
More like: GIMP can do much of what PS can do, but you’ll tear out your hair trying to, cause it’s so unintuitive and slower.
Gimp can make memes
Yeah but if you’re a graphic designers and you’ve to share PSD files with others for your job then you’re going to have a very hard time with Gimp.
That may be a reason to run a dual boot with Windows and your special gfx or cad software that you earn your livelihood from.
But for the other 75% of the time when not working, you have Linux.
Till windows updates and over writes your Lilo or Grub boot. Might be less of thing with non-mbr setups not sure have not dual booted in a long ass time
With EFI you can even install windows after Linux and it will not mess with your systemctl boot. Windows will only put its bootloader in the EFI partition and systemctlboot will continue working. My girlfriend made this and I lost my jaw.
I have not had an issue in… 9 years? Though I use separate physical drives which might help. I wouldn’t let that scare people away
Edit: I’m also using rEFInd Boot Manager. I have about 5 operating systems that I can boot into (good way to try various Linux distros)
Agreed, but sometimes a compromise for a not as good alternative is sufficient depending on the task.
I don’t think that myth exists. If you thought that before trying Linux, where did you get that idea?
I don’t, but a lot of people around here do… and get really offended when you point it out.
Two things. Linux certainly does have a difficult learning curve, at least compared to Windows and OSX. I’m currently in Fedora 39 and I had to dig up some terminal commands off the internet just so I wasn’t choosing between 100% and 200% scaling. That’s just beyond the average computer user.
Secondly, I wish people could stop trying to teach everyone that Linux isn’t the OS. Anyone that cares already knows, and anyone that doesn’t know doesn’t care.
Noob here. What do you mean Linux isn’t the OS?
THANK YOU FOR ASKING, NO IT’S NOT.
I know the name ‘Linux’ is used to identify a family of OSs, but in reality it is actually only the kernel (the part of the system that allows hardware and software to communicate)
Would this be what people are getting at when they say “Gnu/Linux”? Or is it closer to saying “Linux Mint” or something?
This is exactly what people mean when they say GNU/Linux. They are trying to say that it is “the GNU Operating Syatem” with the Linux kernel.
This nonesense though. Please ignore them.
Linux Mint is an operating system. It uses the Linux kernel. The fact that it includes a handful of GNU packages in no way justifies co-opting the branding. Linux Mint includes A LOT of software from many sources. Are you going to try to list them all in the name?
Linux Mint would be an OS built on the Linux Kernel.
Some people have a hang-up on calling any Linux kernel based OS “Linux”, because unlike its competitor, there is a lot of OS flavors.
You have “main” OSes (Debian, Fedora, etc.) and derivative OSes based on these “main” OSes.
Linux Mint for example, is based on Ubuntu, which is based on Debian.
At this point, it is semantics.
Secondly, I wish people could stop trying to teach everyone that Linux isn’t the OS. Anyone that cares already knows, and anyone that doesn’t know doesn’t care.
Ironically, the people who need to hear this don’t care.
It’s 100% stallman trying to coat-tails Linus.
What I’ve learned in 30 years of using Linux is the gnu/Linux distinction only matters to the kind of whacko I can’t work with. It’s a great mineshaft canary to let me know whom not to invest any time in.
Linus wrote a kernel, and GNU wrote the majority of the userspace at the time.
How is that coat-tails-ing? Both projects had a tremendous amount of effort poured into them. And let’s not forget GCC was the only free compiler for 20 years.
If people were asking for it to be called “GNU” only, then it’d be unfair. But they aren’t.
I wish people could stop trying to teach everyone that Big Ben isn’t the name of the clock. Nobody cares.
I wish people would stop trying to explain the difference between “to” and “too”, it really doesn’t matter.
Nock it off, people. If misconceptions are common, that means they’re right.
I don’t think anyone is claiming that common misconceptions somehow become correct, just that having that discussion with someone who doesn’t care is pointless. Also, pedantic discussions like that are something that might turn people off from trying out Linux
Actually, Linux is just the kernel, not the whole OS. The full operating system is called GNU/Linux because it combines the Linux kernel with GNU tools. Teaching people about GNU and why it was made is important. It’s not just about using software but understanding the freedoms behind it – the freedom to use, study, modify, and share. Free Software is about more than just open-source, it’s about user freedom, and that’s a crucial distinction. Now, I’m not forcing you to say GNU/Linux, I say Linux most of the time myself, but you should still teach people about GNU.
It’s far from just GNU utils, though.
Should we say “I don’t use Linux, I use GNU+Linux+systemd+pulseaudio+Wayland+Gnome+[etc]”
Actually that is a common misconception by people who have read political blogs from the 90’s.
The OS that you are calling GNU/Linux is usually less than 2% GNU these days as the GNU Project is only responsible for about a hundred packages. Most Linux distros have between 3,000 and 80,000 packages depending on the distribution.
In fact, if we are talking about software licenses, calling it MIT/Linux would be more appropriate. If we are talking about attribution, Red Hat contributes more code than anybody so perhaps Red Hat/Linux is more up-to-date. That may cause confusion with Red Hat Enterprise Linux though so perhaps IBM/Linux is the best term to use as IBM owns Red Hat these days and is therefore the top contributor to most Linux distros.
Of course, most people just call it Linux because everything above is ridiculous ( including GNU / Linux ).
All that said, teaching people about the FSF, copyleft, and Free Software more generally is super important. The GNU Project itself is more of a historical artifact at this point ( in my view ) but there is no denying its extreme historical importance. It would be great if people knew more about it. Much like BSD.
Teaching people to say GNU / Linux is not only not important but is downright political and factually incorrect. Not a fan.
A lot of people see articles showing how to do something and it uses the terminal and they think that’s the only way to do it. In reality, it’s just easier to say “copy and paste these commands” than it is to walk someone through how to do it in a GUI.
Furthermore, a CLI instruction is DE-agnostic. So you don’t need to cover the same topic with explanations for at least 3/4 desktop environments. GUI instructions also change a lot faster than their CLI counterparts; so by providing the commands one provides the method with the best longevity. Overall, it’s just so much more efficient.
Exactly, I switched to Linux mint a year ago and I’ve used the terminal like… twice lol.
I’m glad you’re happy with Linux. Sometimes I find it hard to believe that things have progressed that far. I’m stuck with the feeling that gui settings and such aren’t reliable, because they didn’t used to be. Moreso, I just know how to do things in the terminal because that’s how I’ve done them for decades.
But you do you. Its great to have options.
The article perpetuates another myth:
And of course, you have dedicated software stores in many Linux distributions.
Repositories are not “stores!” Repositories maximize convenience of discovering and installing Free Software, while “stores” exist to extract money from chumps for enshittified, proprietary crap. There’s a huge fucking difference.
Some GUI package applications use the store metaphor. Pop! OS uses Pop Shop currently and will use COSMIC Store in 24.04 without transactions being involved.
Yeah, and that’s a terrible, misguided thing to do.
Bold words to describe a user friendly metaphor.
The article’s “valuing your time” argument is problematic in certain contexts. My brother has had so much trouble with his dual-boot (Windows and Linux). Yes, he could learn how to solve something in Linux every time a problem arises, but he also has to deliver his projects on time. Because of that, he mostly spends time on his Windows dual boot. Yeah, it sucks ethically and has its own pragmatic issues, but he has never had issues resolving dependencies or hunting down the most recent version that can actually be run in NixOS.
I don’t doubt these will become issues that will not be as problematic in the future, but right now my brother cannot use Linux reliably for his assignments.
Edit: My brother has tried what I use: Fedora and NixOS. He has also tried PopOS.
In Fedora, he found some of his software didn’t exist as .deb, and struggled to make .tar files work smoothly for him.
He tried NixOS afterward. He really liked the whole immutability thing, as well as the idea that apps would have their own dependencies.
His dependency problem happened in PopOS. If I remember correctly, it was a code editor that required a version of something that was different to what a package he used in his software was.
I think the order he tried was Fedora -> NixOS -> PopOS -> NixOS -> ? (Haven’t talked to him about it recently)
I would argue that NixOS absolutely is the OS you get if your time is worthless, but not every distro is the same. I’d argue that if you need something that doesn’t have so many issues a stabler or easier to use distro (Debian, Ubuntu, Pop!_OS, Linux Mint, and even Fedora or openSUSE) is going to be a better option than trying to bend specifically NixOS to do what you want.
I personally use a mix of Pop, Debian, and Fedora, not because they’re particularly powerful, but because they tend to be more straightforward for what I want to do than NixOS, Gentoo, or Arch. I don’t mind tinkering, but for my main machines I don’t want to tinker much.
Edit: I should clarify that there are plenty of reasonable uses of Windows and I don’t fault anyone for using it especially if their familiarity is keeping them from understanding Linux as well as they want to. But I also would make the case that there are a lot of distros out there.
I would argue that NixOS absolutely is the OS you get if your time is worthless
Hard disagree. Does it require you to climb through heaps of trash documentation? Absolutely. But, if you persevere, you got yourself a rock solid system that will even make Debian Stable jealous; all while requiring no maintenance.
- Better documentation has been made available since relatively recently.
Does it require you to climb through heaps of trash documentation? Absolutely.
That’s why I think the previous commenter’s statement rings true. I’ve been using Linux exclusively for over a decade across multiple distros. NixOS is not intuitive for new or seasoned users, making good documentation vital.
An example: I spent a good weekend day or so poking at NixOS. Live boot worked as expected. When I finished, I had a bootable system but no network stack, despite following the docs. This means that my only route forward would be going back to the live boot since there was no way to pull packages in that state.
I decided to go with Fedora Silverblue as my next test. After dding the image to my USB, it took about 10 mins to get up and running. I was able to setup libvirt and other similar software quick and easy. And once I’m happy, I can write my config to a repo and have my base system wherever, whenever.
I just wanted to offer some nuance to the table. After everything has been learned, enabling some (otherwise complex and obscure) features can be accomplished by a single line in your NixOS config. Like, this efficiency can not and should not be ignored.
You can find some of my thoughts on Fedora Atomic in another comment found under this post. Spoiler alert; for a lot of people, it’s what they seek from NixOS but (by contrast) with excellent delivery. I won’t ignore that it doesn’t have some of the more insane/interesting functionalities that NixOS provides. But, some just want atomicity, reproducibility and (some) declarativity; and Fedora Atomic does deliver on those without requiring you to go into the deep and learn an entire new language that’s only used for managing your distro 😅.
I just wanted to offer some nuance to the table. After everything has been learned, enabling some (otherwise complex and obscure) features can be accomplished by a single line in your NixOS config. Like, this efficiency can not and should not be ignored.
I really appreciate it. I really WANT to like NixOS. The level of efficiency and portability (ex. Nix as package manager) is incredible and, I think, well worth learning about both for users and distros - I hope we see the ideas propagate further. It’s just not in a place that I can be happy using it. But, it is going to tickle some people the right way and that is something that makes me happy.
Fedora Atomic does deliver on those without requiring you to go into the deep and learn an entire new language that’s only used for managing your distro 😅.
This right here is why I’m liking it so far. I’m like Alton Brown is to cooking gadgets when it comes to languages in computing, I really don’t like unitaskers. I get unreasonably resentful of software that forces me to use a DSL (this is a “me” problem).
