I meant Microsoft’s Xbox input method, absolutely nothing against x.org

Having developers pay a one time fee for dedicated servers that the players don’t need to pay for is amazing.

I wish, the first one still stands as the best controller imo but it still has so much that can be improved (USB C, dual thumbsticks and trackpads, two back paddles, improved haptics, better gyro, better ergonomics, etc).

I just hate the very concept of Linux being monetized. I don’t think it’ll happen and I don’t want it to happen.

Steaminput is a massive deal, it supports gyro, remapping, profiles, and extensive customization. XInput can’t compare and the epic games store relies on developers for everything. That’s the reason why I will always pick a Steam Controller over an Xbox controller.

This is why Steam is as popular as it is, they just release features that people like. Sure GOG doesn’t have DRM and Epic Games gives a bigger share to developers but Steam gives players what they actually want.

Fundamentally that doesn’t make any sense, unlike Apple or Google Linux can’t charge a percentage for subscriptions. Right now companies are getting away with not contributing any money to Linux, why would they magically start? Furthermore who would they pay? Not everyone uses flatpaks and adding paid apps/subscriptions would be highly controversial. Even if it did work the money made would be a tiny fraction of what android makes.

I am talking about businesses supporting the Linux desktop with software, not about the OS devs themselves.

What money is there in desktop Linux? Companies don’t support things without expecting something in return.

Finally, someone gets my point. Capitalism inherently makes products worse and more expensive, the flaw in your argument is you think it can ever be contained.

I acknowledge that, the rise has been absolutely incredible. However, I doubt it’ll reach above 10% (on the desktop globally).

Well that’s a lie. Lots of companies use Linux servers, Linux embedded devices

I mentioned that

even Linux desktops for programmers or engineers. Android devices are everywhere too. One of the most common uses of Linux is smartphones.

They make money because they’re proprietary, sell peoples info, and because of that they represent everything the free software movement fights against. I use Linux because it supports the free software movement, not the other way around.

The better question is why aren’t people supporting desktop Linux?

It’s a combination of a few factors, developers are pressured into not asking for donations (users need to actively find their website to donate), the vast majority of Linux software is free of price, and people don’t want to pay money for their operating system.

People know, they see their digital media being removed from them and they know that their devices spy on them. Everyone talks about it yet nobody cares.

People have accepted that they’ll never have privacy, that they dont own the products they purchase (physical or digital), that not only do they not control their technology but fundamentally their technology controls them, that every few years they’ll have to replace their devices or the manufacturer stops supporting them, people own nothing and are happy.

Some people like you and I actually switch to Linux, but we’re the 4% and we need to remember that.

I don’t think something needs to be identical to Windows to be a good replacement for it.

I said drop in replacement

Wider application support would be a start.

No organization is willing to pay companies to support Linux

Some distributions and parts of modern Linux systems can be unnecessarily complex or downright esoteric. Some features like HDR have very poor support, and are difficult to enable/setup where they are supported.

That’s because organizations like the Linux foundation primarily serve enterprise and server customers, they only need a good enough UI so that’s what desktop users get. Nobody is paying money for Linux and few people donate.

It’s also difficult for developers to publish to Linux because of the wide variety of different Linux systems. Flatpaks and snaps help with this obviously but have divisive in the Linux community for one reason or another.

That’s because the current system allows distribution maintainers to decide if they want their distro to be bleeding edge or stable.

TLDR: Desktop Linux users get the scraps of enterprise and server Linux

The problem is the average user won’t use Linux unless it comes included with their PC.

That’s because what people need to understand is that fundamentally Linux is not a drop in replacement for Windows, its not some open source copy. It’ll never have full software compatibility, it’ll never run the same, it’ll never look exactly the same, and it’ll never be the same. The sooner people accept that the sooner people understand what their options are. For me that’s an advantage, I like the UI on DEs like Cosmic, I love the Unix filesystem, I love the terminal and how powerful it is, I love package managers, and I love the customizability of it all.

The Microsoft cycle:

Microsoft does thing nobody likes -> people complain -> some people threaten to switch to Linux -> a few of those people do but most people don’t -> They make some excuse and claim that once Linux reaches some arbitrary milestone they’ll switch (Adobe support, better game support, better software support, etc) -> most of those people forget (they’re a minority, the vast majority of people never cared) -> Microsoft notices and they became even more emboldened to make their products worse -> repeat

If you want change then you need to break the cycle

Nuh uh :3

I’m saying internally, they call themselves a police force for external (aka public) relations. Internally they feel no need to use pretty language.