It's the same way Mastodon and the Fediverse is so damn frustrating to many people. They don't want to have to think and just want shit to work.

Remember that Android is Linux-based -- so keeping that in mind, a massive amount of normal users use Linux on a daily basis.

I think the key is, operating systems are meant to exist in the background. If it's working well, you don't think about it at all.

This is always a hilarious conversation because the diehard Linux users will lie up and down about how Linux has no problems and it's just you that's too dumb to understand how to use it.

Linux user here, also once upon a time a Windows admin. I think the most difficult thing for most users is not that Linux is difficult, but that it is different.

Take Pop_OS for example. For the average "I check email and surf the web" user, it works wonderfully. But most people grew on Windows or Mac so its just not what they're used to. Linux is kind of the stick shift to Windows and Mac's automatic transmission... its not hard to learn, but most folk don't choose to make the effort because they don't need to.

The following sums up my experience with Linux thus far: "It's never been easier for the newb to jump right in, but heavens help them if they ever stray from the straight path".

There's been a lot of effort to make things easier for a newb (used to Windows and all that shit) to do what they need to do in most cases. There's been all sorts of GUI-based stuff that means for the 'average' user, there's really no need for them to interact with the command line. That's all well and good until you need to do something that wasn't accounted for by the devs or contributors.

All of a sudden, you'd have not only to use the command line, you may also have to consult one of the following:

• Well-meaning, easy to understand, but ultimately unhelpfully shallow help pages (looking at you, Libre Office), or the opposite: deep, dense, and confusing (Arch) Wiki pages.
• One of the myriads of forum pages each telling the user to RTFM, "program the damned thing yourself", "go back to Windows", all of the above, or something else that delivers the same unhelpful message.
• Ultra-dense and technical man pages of a command that might possibly be of help.

And that's already assuming you've got a good idea of what the problem was, or what it is that you are to do. Trouble-shooting is another thing entirely. While it's true that Linux has tons of ways to make troubleshooting a lot easier, such as logs, reading through them is a skill a lot of us don't have, and can't be expected of some newb coming from Windows.

To be fair to Linux though, 90% of the time, things are well and good. 9% of the time, there's a problem here and there, but you're able to resolve it with a little bit of (online) help, despite how aggravating some of that "help" might be. 1% of the time, however, Linux will really test your patience, tolerance, and overall character.

Unfortunately, it's that 10% that gives Linux its "hard to use" reputation, and the 1% gives enough scary stories for people to share.

People hate Linux because shows they aren’t computer experts, they’re just Windows power users.

There's a lot of little things to you need to learn, that you don't learn until actually messing around with in Linux which absolutely make or break your experience with Linux, and that Linux users will mock you for asking about.

For a lot of people windows just works how they want it, so when they're convinced to switch by a friend/family member/youtuber they now have to relearn what was incredibly easy for them, which absolutely will cause frustrations regardless.

And a lot of Linux dudes get really defensive and elitist when you ask them to explain or help, like screaming that you're afraid of the command line when you've just never needed to use it before. So the initial learning curve is rough, to het more or less what you had before(For an avg user)

Like. I'm sorry, but having an issue keeping you from using your pc, and only getting advice to read the documentation of the distro, when you could have just kept windows, is going to frustrate people

I'm a devops engineer, so I understand Linux well. I actually used exclusively Linux all throughout university.

Linux works just as good as windows for 98% of my uses cases. And for the 2% that it doesnt, I can probably figure out how to get it to work or an alternative.

But honestly, I usually just don't want to anymore. After working 8 hours, I'm very seldom in the mood to do more debugging, so I switch to Windows more and more frequently.

If this is my experience as someone who understands it, most normies will just fuck off the moment the first program they want to run doesn't.

I've been exclusively using Linux for almost a decade now. I started in high school when the computer we had at home was painfully slow with Windows. At start, it did seem a bit hard to wrap my head around. I was a kid, and there was no one who used Linux to teach me. I guess the installation etc. are much simpler nowadays. And the online spaces are much less toxic.

Even after all that, the main reason, I believe, is that it's different. If someone is using a stable distro like Debian, and just wants to do what 90% of people do (i.e. browsing, looking at documents media etc.), Linux isn't really a hassle. The installation process might be daunting to some people. But after that, they don't need to open a terminal ever if they don't want to. My sister is basically tech illiterate, and she's been running Mint for a few years now. Never heard any complaints. Only issue she had was when she deleted her .config folder. But I had set up a script that backed up dotfiles to her external drive, so it was easily fixable.

People get frustrated because whenever something happens on Linux, and they go online, they see all these walls of text that they need to read, and commands they need to run. But they forget that on Windows and Macs, that isn't even an option. Most of the time, you need to reset your system. Or, in the case of Macs, get it replaced. The frustration that people experience is caused by conditioning. They accept the inconveniences of Windows and Macs because they grew up with it. But since Linux is new to them, the shortcomings stick out much more.

TL;DR: For the average user, the OS doesn't matter (they should probably still use Linux for increased privacy). For the power user, unless some specific applications they need are missing, Linux is always the best choice. The frustration is mostly due to conditioning.

Have at look at this: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian

I found this to be invaluable when I was borking stuff all the time.

the year of Linux ladies and gentlemen

For most people computers are just the same as cars. People want a car that will drive them from place to place, are easy to refuel, easy to operate, and can be taken to an expert for anything difficult or that requires specialized knowledge. Same for computers. Most people want a computer to navigate the web, install the apps they are used to and that their friends use, is easy to operate, and can be taken to an expert for any involved work.

Even the friendliest of Linux distro don't check all those boxes. You cant get ready support from a repair shop, many of the apps are different or function differently, and it doesn't receive all the same love and attention from major third party developers as Windows does.

Most people could learn to use Linux; it's not that hard. Most people could learn to change their own oil. But for most people, it's not worth it. For most people it's not the journey, it's the destination and cars and computers are just tools to get there.

Every software generates errors, problems, and weird bullshit. The main difference I see in this regard, is that Linux usually explicitly tells you what's wrong, and there is always at least couple of ways to deal with it. You have a range of solutions, you have paths to understand and fix the problem, or at least copy enough random commands from StackOverflow to either fix it or break it completely.
With other OS you kind of stuck. Either your problem has a solution someone already thought of, or there is nothing to be done.
As an example, my colleague and me bought the same bluetooth headset, and it didn't work out of the box neither with his windows machine, nor with my Linux. He did the usual reinstall drivers - reboot - reconnect - google shit routine, didn't find a solution, and returned the headset. I did my routine, found the patch for bt-pipewire app, applied it and it finally worked. Later he said "your Linux is stupid, you always have to do some complicated stuff with it, and my windows just works", but I couldn't hear him over the sound of music I was enjoying with my new working headset.

My first experience with linux was Ubuntu. Sue me, it was listed under most "most user friendly distro" listicles when I wasn't smart enough to realize those were mostly marketing.

It worked fine for my purposes, though it took getting used to, but it would wake itself up from sleep after a few minutes. I would have to shut it off at night so that I wouldn't wake up in a panic as an eerie light emanated through the room from my closed laptop. I did my best searching for the problem, but could never find a solution that worked; in retrospect, I probably just didn't have the language to adequately describe the problem.

Nothing about the GUI was well-documented to the degree that CLI apps were. If I needed to make any changes, there would be like one grainy video on youtube that showed what apps to open and buttons to click and failed to solve my problem, but a dozen Stack Exchange articles telling me exactly what to do via the terminal.

I remember going off on some friends online when they tried to convince me Linux and the terminal were superior. I ranted about how this stupid sleep issue was indicative of larger, more annoying problems that drove potential users away. I raged about how hostile to users this esoteric nerds-only UX is. I cried about Windows could be better for everyone if the most computer-adept people would stop jumping ship for mediocre OSes.

I met another friend who used Arch (btw) within a year from that hissy fit, and she fixed my laptop within minutes. Using a CLI app nonetheless. I grumbled angrily to myself.

A few years later and everyone's home all the time for some reason, and I get the wild idea that I'm going to be a(n ethical) hacker for whatever reason. I then proceeded to install Kali on a VM and the rest is history.

The point being that some people labor under the misguided belief that technology should conform to the users, and because we were mostly raised on Windows or Mac, we develop the misconception that those interfaces are "intuitive" (solely because we learned them during the best time in our life to pick up new skills). Then you try to move to linux for whatever reason and everything works differently and the process is jarring and noticeably requires the user conforming to the technology--i.e. changing bad habits learned from other OSes to fit the new one. The lucky few of us go on to learn many other OSes and start to see beyond the specifics to the abstract ideas similar to all of them, then it doesn't matter if you have to work with iOS or TempleOS, you understand the basics of how it all fits together.

TL;DR Category theorists must be the least frustrated people alive

There’s always software I can’t use properly (and not just Windows stuff), some stuff badly configured with weird error messages… last time I was not able to even use the apt command

I'm not sure what you were doing to break apt, but it was probably something pretty funky (or at least adding a bunch of repos without really thinking about it).

The thing with Linux is that it doesn't stop you doing stupid shit as much as Windows. If you know what you're doing, that's a really good thing. It's really annoying when your OS stops you doing something for your own protection if you know that you're not going to break anything. Simple example: Windows locks any file that's open, Linux doesn't. That's really convenient, but you can screw things up badly if you're not careful.

If you're a beginner, I would suggest sticking to the GUI, i.e. control panels, software installed, etc. in Ubuntu. If you ever go into command line, be really careful, and understand what you're doing. Definitely do not copy and paste commands you find online without understanding them reasonably well. Ubuntu puts in pretty good protections in its graphical tools. You'll be able to do whatever you need to do, but shouldn't break anything. Over time, you'll pick up some knowledge and be able to do more in the command line (etc.) without breaking things.

When I was a child we had basic computer literacy classes in elementary school. They showed you how to get around Windows and use computers a bit. Somehow, I doubt that those kinds of classes ever taught Linux.

But the real problem I think is that Linux distros also never had Microsoft's budget to develop, assemble, test, and release the operating system + software suite. The fact that Linux is as good as it is in spite of that is really something special.

If you want a fair comparison between Windows, MacOS and Linux then I think its wrong to compare distros that don't come pre-installed when you buy your device.

Not one single MacBook owner had to install their OS and configure drivers etc. None of my family, friends or coworkers had to install Windows on any of their PCs (I know that some people do but not in any of my social circles).

Consider Pop_OS from System76 or Tuxedo OS from Tuxedo Computers, they have identical user experiences as Mac or PC:

Step 1: Buy computer Step 2: Turn on Step 3: Answer some one time setup questions Step 4: Get on with your life

If you have the opportunity to build your own PC and fresh install an OS from scratch then when you come across a problem that you don't have experience with you will be understandably frustrated.

Specifically Windows has the advantage that hardware manufactures always make drivers for Windows. If your hardware is supported then the Linux OS installation is not very different, but when the hardware is not plug-and-play then configuring Linux becomes its own kind of frustration torture.

TL;DR Get your computer with the OS already installed, then Linux is no more frustrating than a Mac or PC. Install Linux yourself and your mileage may vary.

I've been using Linux for so long that it's hard for me to give an approximation of what a new user might find challenging, but I think that something important to remember is that computers are hard. I've spent my entire life studying computers and I'm still learning every day.

Most people grew up with Windows and learned how to use it over the years, but remember that it took years, and most of them still aren't very good at it. Linux requires different knowledge than Windows, but it doesn't inherently mean that it's harder. If everyone grew up using Linux we wouldn't hear about "how hard Linux is" but instead about "how hard Windows is".

At least when something is broken in Linux, it probably has a cause (usually the user) and solution, and a way to debug what happened. When something breaks in Windows you've got about 3 things you can try before the solution is to reinstall.

As for solutions, I don't know if there's a certified pathway into Linux - I think installing something like Linux Mint and just using it like a computer would go a long way towards getting you comfortable with how Linux works without forcing you to study. Once you're comfortable using the GUI, you can take a peek behind the scenes at your leisure - there is documentation everywhere for everything on Linux.

Nearly everyone forgets how hard windows was to learn initially.

I spent the better part of a child hood and the first 10 years of an IT career learning it. Does that sound like a simple or easy system? Conversely I've spent slightly less time but an equal 10 years of an IT career learning and supporting Linux. I've only recently in the last 3 or so years started to feel like I truly grasp Linux and started using it as a daily driver on personal machines.

I now find Windows absolutely horrible to work with. All the nonsense MS foists on it's users. The inflexibility. The weird choices. The licensing nonsense.

The bottom line is not that Linux is harder. It's that Linux is different and different is scary and uncomfortable. Different is hard, not linux. People are lazy and creatures of habit. We like familiar. Few of us actually enjoy the work of learning something new that isn't easy. If we did more of us would probably be pilots or engineers or whatever hard thing to learn you want to choose.

If you're into computers and you still find it hard or constraining keep at it. The Ah, ha! moment is coming. There's a paradigm shift in thinking you'll hit and suddenly you'll get it. When you do you'll find it's magnificent and powerful and freeing.

I think it is a mix of closed mindedness and unfair metrics.

Like no one would say that Windows sucks because it cannot run Final Cut Pro, but that standard gets put on Linux all the time.

As far as intuitive that has to do with context. Going from Windows to macOS or in reverse is also going to take some getting used to.

Lots of things don't have a GUI, if we expect users to eat up the CLI, the year of the Linux desktop will never come.

In my experience, users get frustrated with Linux because they think they know a lot about computers, but in reality just know a lot about Windows. These people are unwilling to learn new workflows and OS concepts, so they get frustrated and give up. Of course, this isn't to say Linux can't be genuinely frustrating, because it 100% can be, but I think Linux and Windows are equally frustrating if you know them both well.

It's hard to say why your experience was frustrating without many more details.

In my experience, when Linux works, it’s beautiful (yay package managers). But once you have an issue or go off the beaten path, it can get complex and confusing very quickly. You’ll find a perfect fix… oh wait, that’s for Red Hat. This is Ubuntu and everything is different.

This man page is thirty pages long and has in depth descriptions of all fifty switches in alphabetical order, but all i want is an example on how to do a very simple, common thing with it. And of course, all commands have their own syntax (of course windows isn’t any better, outside of Powershell).

Don’t curl to bash, it’s dangerous. But heaven help the adventurer that tries to do the install manually. And building from the source? Hah!

The registry gets a ton of shit, and yes, it can be opaque and confusing, but hundreds of text files in hundreds of random directories (that might be a different place on a different distro), all with their own syntax, isn’t necessarily all that more intuitive.

You want this to work differently? Then code a fix yourself! What do you mean you’re not a programmer?

I had multiple Ubuntu installs stop updating because the installer by default made the /boot partition (IIRC) something like 100MB. Do a couple updates and that gets filled up with unused files, and then apt craps itself. And this wasn’t all too long ago - well after the point it was supposed to be the district for the everyman.

Like you, I want to like it more, but it’s never smooth sailing. Granted, a lot of that is familiarity with Windows (and believe me, many curses have been thrown MS’s way), but it always seems to turn into a struggle.

Most of linux fustration come with a lack of drivers and its fragmentation :

• some friend's printer doesn't work with my linux.
• I remember having a very hard time understanding optimus (nvidia-intel) and making it work.
• when you use flatpak some thing doesn't work because it's sealed.
• when a distro remove a very important package...and i have to find it, reinstall it
• some graphical issue due to the various DE, or an app that haven't updated its graphical scheme.

So most of time, i follow the forum because things aren't working as expected. I lose an incredible amount of time doing that but i love it.

Linux as desktop did lot progress and i believe immutable OS with flatpak/snap will solve the fragmentation issue.

Reading comments, it's soo strange that I never borked my system once during nearly 7 years of linux usage. Playing games were frustrating, but it was improved a lot by now. My ubuntu never failed to boot, the only audio problem I had was with the mic. Even better, KDE Connect introduced new workflow to me. I wonder why my computer always boots well even when it gets borked during shutdown..

Nowadays, I use my own hand-rolled DE. It still refuses to break on me. Guess I am really lucky or something.

I think the answer to your question about why it’s frustrating for some people and not others has a lot to do with use case.

One use case that easily makes Linux way less frustrating is of developing software, especially in low-level languages. If you’re writing and debugging software, reading documentation is something you do every day, which makes it a lot easier. Most of the issues where people break their systems, don’t know how it happened, and can’t figure out how to fix it are because they default to copying bash commands from a Wordpress blog from 2007 instead of actually reading the documentation for their system. If you’re developing software, a log of the software you’re installing and using is open source, so you benefit tremendously from a package manager that’s baked into the OS.

If your use case is anything like that, Windows in particular is way more frustrating to use IMO.

If instead your use case is using a web browser and a collection of proprietary closed-source GUI tools, then most of the benefits that you’re getting using Linux are more ephemeral. You get the benefit of using a free and open source OS, not being tied into something that built to spy on you, not supporting companies that use copyrights to limit the free access of information and tools, etc. Those benefits are great and super important, and I would still recommend Linux if you’re up to it, but they definitely don’t make computing any easier.

If your use case is anything like the second one, you’re probably used to following online guides without needing to understand how each step works, and you’re probably used to expecting that software will make it hard for you to break it in a meaningful way. Both of those things directly contribute to making Linux might be frustrating to use at times for you.

If you’re in the second category, the best advice is to get used to going to the official webpage for the applications you use and actually reading the docs. When you run into a problem, try to find information about it the docs. It’s fine to use guides or other resources, but whenever you do, try to look up the docs for the commands that you’re using and actually understand what you’re doing. RTFM is a thing for a reason haha.

As a linux noob, I can't give some in depth explanation, but I can empathize over troubles troubleshooting 😭

I mean, to first acknowledge the base difficulties of just getting used to a new operating system that doesn't want to hold your hand, all the troubleshooting advice being splintered across multiple distros and updates, and most software just not being designed to be compatible with Linux, it's impressive there are distros that manage to be beginner-friendly-ish in the first place.

For instance, when I was setting up Ubuntu, the following didn't work out of the box:

• The general need to reinstall every program you use
• The microphone
• Switching between Windows and Ubuntu led to a weird time difference on Window's part (it still does)
• My fingerprint sensor stopped working (I don't even think this is fixable)
• My brightness hotkeys stopped working (they still don't)
• touchpad scrolling was really fast (I honestly just got used to this rather than fixing it)
• Increased the icon size of a lot of things
• Set up night light settings

But more than that, I'd say one of the hardest things about Linux is that it is so customizable it inspires me to find a solution to issues I would've just ignored on Windows. For example:

• I moved the time bar from the top of the screen to the bottom
• Set up my own searx instance (though I hardly use it, if anyone knows how to run a set of code on computer startup please lmk)
• Installed wine, Lutris, and software to support Linux gaming
• Set my wallpaper to rotate between a bunch of landscape photos

But ig that's just my 2 cents. Really I wrote this to feel proud of myself for all the troubleshooting I've done 😭

Edit: I frfr love all yall who responded to this with genuine advice, what a great community

I'm a lifelong windows power user, and above average even in my industry for knowledge on technical expertise.

Nothing I know translates to Linux. Not the file structures, the commands, the permissions, the file systems.

You truly have to commit to learning an entirely parallel form of computing environment to become comfortable in Linux. And being frank, it is the most customizable and unique user experience out there, but it is also infinitely less user friendly. And for every time a 2 line terminal command fixes a problem and saves time compared with windows, there are dozens of instances where time is wasted for hours learning that command, its exact syntax and usage, and if it is the one you need for your circumstance.

Another user here recently said that it was when they were going through and compiling their own drivers to make their Webcam work and having to follow guides to make system specific tweaks that they just quit and went back to Windows for ease of use.

Linux is the OS of power users. Not even power users like me, but extreme power users who either have the time or training to learn that parallel system. All of which is easy if this is your job, but in many ways you are learning a second language of sorts.

After using Linux for years now I still don't understand where programs install to, it's always in some random ass folder.

I really wish the Linux community would do a better job of separating the software updates from the core operating system and user space apps. I feel like most distros do the 'move fast and break things' approach, even if that isn't what they intended to do. I forget which distro it was, but they tried replacing X11 with Wayland way before the other distros, and IIRC, they had to revert everyone back to X11. This type of thing cannot be managed by regular users.

Imagine if you had to understand how 90% of every car part worked in order to drive a car, and if you don't understand something you ask for help and everyone ridicules you because they are mechanics.

For many it is simply frustrating because it is not Windows. Just think about how many people have a hard time already to get the most simple things done on Windows. Can you imagine those people to switch to another platform? Those people who cannot find their banking app anymore when something moved the icon on the desktop to another position?

Learning cli tools takes time. My advice: don't do anything unless you are %100 sure what you are doing or you know how to revert whatever you did. When I first started using Linux I used to mess everything up by trying to solve my problems copy-pasting commands blindly. But in time I wanted to know what those commands were are, what each argument did etc. Apart from the cli tools, one can still mess things up with GUI apps if you edit system files blindly. Now this happens for people who want to dive a bit deeper. If you want a less risky swim, there are immutable distros where it's less likely to break things.

I still keep track of what I install and what I change on my system. That helps a lot too.

Ubuntu LTS almost never does the things described without user intervention. E.g. breaking over time, apt not working. The most important thing I learned about Linux and Ubuntu was that I was breaking it. Once I drilled that into my head and began learning what not to do, it stopped breaking over time. My main system hasn't been reinstalled since 2016. And that's only because I was bored and reinstalled it at the time. Friends have Ubuntu LTS systems that they've had woking for over a decade, moved over several hardware configs during that time.

With that I have this advice for the newer users:

• Use Ubuntu LTS. Almost everything else has an extra level of complexity or several that aren't obvious when you first start using them. Yes even user-friendly Ubuntu derivatives. Ubuntu LTS has an extremely large test base so defects are few. It's also stable so the number of defects generally declines over time for a given release.
• Use the canonical sources of information for Ubuntu. Askubuntu.com, the Ubuntu wiki, the Ubuntu forums, man pages. The Debian wiki can be useful too. Arch'es wiki becomes useful when you begin to know what you're doing so you can translate what's there to Ubuntu.
• Don't use YouTube for that or random sites that have SEOd themselves to the top of Google. Or ChatGPT.
• The first question you should ask when something breaks is "What did I do wrong?". Trace your steps. Answer it. Fix it and don't do it again. E.g. something that should work without sudo doesn't, so you run it with sudo. A true classic.

I know many here won't like me suggesting Ubuntu, but the reality is that throwing new users elsewhere is often a disservice to them. Even Debian, which I use too. The proliferation of "Ubuntu bad" across the newer slivers of the community has been just "bad" for those new users. There's a lot of us that can help support new users but we can't do that in places where the "Just try X distro instead" comments outnumber us 10 to 1. In addition there's so much misinformation thrown around as fact that we just can't compete. The D-K level is too damn high.jpg

Source: I've used Linux for 19-years and professionally since 2012, for more use cases than I can count.