Is it that top of the line software truly doesn’t exist for linux, that it’s impossible to the work done, or is it possible BUT you have to spend more time tinkering and learning the quirks of quite admittedly rough around the edges open source software? That yes, it’s less efficient, but actually more rewarding knowing that the software you worked on was open source. And one you actually learn how to use open source software, nobody can take it away from you.
Look at unity! They gutted the program through its egregious licensing structure and now people are scrambling for alternatives. People that sticked with Godot didn’t have the same trouble. It was just another Wednesday
Of course open source can’t play on the same level as proprietary software right now. It doesn’t have the same money thrown at it than proprietary software! But the appeal of open source is that every change is guaranteed to benefit you, not some arbitrary bottom line. Proprietary software is polished, but you are at the whims of a big tech company.
If i were to base my profession on software, spend literal years of my life depending on code, i really would fucking like to look inside that shit sometimes. Anything else is like building a skyscraper out of quicksand
It’s great to use open source software. But once you need to use CAD for work, you’re gonna use the most efficient tool you can find no matter what OS it requires.
Also you CAN get your workplace to shift over to something else.
Not every workplace will change procedures, but some will. Especially if it’s software that handles local data or if there are high costs or privacy risks, they can be convinced.
You’re gonna get a whole team of people retrained with software they’re not used to, probably doesn’t have proper support or learning resources to fall back on, and may lack features or compatibility?
They might save some money, but a lot of businesses are more than happy to pay a lot to ensure they don’t have to worry about the above, and they can get on with their company’s actual purpose.
You’re gonna get a whole team of people retrained with software they’re not used to, probably doesn’t have proper support or learning resources to fall back on, and may lack features or compatibility?
Like the jump from Windows 10 to Windows 11? People move to unfamiliar software all the time, then complain about it for a bit and then cope.
I work in support, the amount of people I ask are you running windows 10 or 11 and don’t know the answer should be enough of an indicator that when they did upgrade, they barely noticed.
I work in support, the amount of people I ask are you running windows 10 or 11 and don’t know the answer should be enough of an indicator that when they did upgrade, they barely noticed.
Those people don’t know the product names. That’s it. Obviously they noticed that the core piece of GUI interaction moved from left-aligned to centered, just as they notice when after an update a giant search bar appeared on the middle of the desktop.
Well companies continue to get new software and learn new skills. They might not switch as soon as you suggest it, but it could get revisited later on when renewing a contract.
This also depends a lot on the size of the team and the work that’s being done. If required features are missing or there are compatibility issues, then that’s one thing. If people prefer the other product, or enough workers share similar views on the topic, then it’s easier to switch.
Again it doesn’t happen all the time, but it’s worth bringing up. If anything, it shows you’re thinking about how to improve your work and the business (financially, ethically). I’ve seen times when changes were made, and I’ve seen times when it wasn’t.
The support thing is a fair point, where companies would rather outsource risk than self host the thing. In that case it’s a matter of picking the most trustworthy company to outsource to. Best case scenario, the other company is doing things just as well as yours would have with the added benefit that they’re focussed on doing one thing well.
Yeah, but people who bring these things up act like everyone needs these things to get their day to day work done. Like everyone works in an architect office, industrial design firm or print marketing agency.
In the grand scheme of things the people who NEED to run Photoshop or CAD programs are edge cases.
The real reason people need windows for work is non-technical corporate and government IT departments. Windows management software (eg. Exchange) is too deeply embedded in the organisation and it is too time consuming and expensive to remove.
I hope you are kidding, trolling, as those things, plus audio/video editing, started fron unix when it wasn't conceivable to do so on PCs with proprietary OS. All those corporations who later sold such sw copied/stole FOSS and dressed it up as their own.
No team or corporation can ever ever catch up to FOSS development. It is a neo-liberal fallacy that promotes them on marketing hype.
If you want something that looks and behaves much like the Windows desktop environment, use Linux Mint. If you want something closer to the macOS environment, use Pop OS.
There was an interview with Dreamworks ( i think that was the Animation house) they use linux for everything.
In engineering CAD and large manufacturing corporations RHEL and SUSE are the two certified distros for running Teamcenter Product Lifecycle Management softare and Siemens NX CAD/CAM/FEA software (up to version 12) it is a smaller market than Windows versions, but probably took the place of the original unix versions prior to 2000
Any web hosting company will use Linux for all servers, and many developers will use it as their workstation as they tire of kludging together dev environments in windows. The devops engineers will most certainly be on Linux as that is where their tool chains live.
There are government agencies that use Linux exclusively. The DoD used to have a mandate to use oss. I’m not sure if it is still the case.
companies that do IC design, do it under linux. traditionally they were using proprietary unixes, but today it is mostly linux and redhat or compatible systems.
engineers are using rhel workstations from dell and hp that are supported by vendors to work under linux: let’s say bios updates are possible to run from within linux.
their whole workflow depends on unix with many custom scripts (shell, perl, tcl) and simulations, usage of shared filesystems, and even x forwarding.
afaik IT departments in such companies aren’t happy to support linux workstations and the trend is to move the workflew to linux servers and let the engineers to connect to those via ssh, vnc or x or commercial solutions like ‘citrix’.
my understanding is also that companies design some requirrments, though maybe based on what is available on the market, and love to have support and solutions that are integrated with each other. microsoft still has everybody hooked up, their ‘active directory’ feels to IT people necessary, they also use microsoft’s disk encryption, and/or third party windows software which encrypts everything written to usb flash drives to prevent leakage of what they call ‘intellectual property’.
it is of course possible to do luks encryption of linux disk drives, but afaik rhel doesn’t support it, or rhel versions these companies tend to use, since they tend to use very outdated systems, even eol unsupported systems, because ‘customers still use those’.
i am also not aware of linux versions of those draconian services that encrypt everything that gets written to the flash drives, or that monitor/control computer usage, web requests, etc, so companies are interested to concentrate unix systems in data centers and get rid of linux end user workstations because these require custom approaches or draconian control software is not available, while windows users can be controlled better, with available corporate solutions.
I use awesome. Right now I use pretty standard key bindings. I have it looking more like i3, due to the awful wibar placement and font size. I’ve thought about making special key bindings for constantly used programs however I’m pretty content with Super-P and type the program I want. The most customized I have the awesome config file is, the only available layout is set to spiral and dwindle.
Soon I’d like to implement glyphs and once I figure that out I’ll be more apt to make keyboard shortcuts. I also would like to see if I can round up the awful wibar.
Try it with a Live USB stick. And maybe don’t listen to the people recommending Ubuntu. It’s somewhat okay, but they regularly do annoying business decisions that affect their users. I’d rather start with Mint or something.
There are many other websites dedicated to this question:
I fell for the lie of flatpak not being bloated, I just nuked flatpak from my PC since I just run arch anyways. Im not sure if repo is safe to remove. You might be able to run rmlint -g and see how much data can be deduplicated on an FS level, I never checked myself since I run f2fs, but if you run an FS with dedupe capabilities it may work for you.
It’s not as dramatic for me but it’s still bad. I myself freed at least 20 Gb from my computer when I remove flat pack and all of its crap. and migrated my apps to aur myself.
Convenient libraries/frameworks are fat. Because they are fat, they need frequent updates/security fixes, breaking codebase more often. With flatpack, developers can freeze lib versions at a convenient point, without caring for system dependencies.
We run thousands of Red Hat VMs at my company (and probably as many Windows), and several of my colleagues run various distros on their laptops with all our required desktop tools/security agents.
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.