“You use Ubuntu and don’t know whether you have apt, or what it is? That is actually a bit amazing. Apt is the front-end to dpkg, which is the standard Debian package management system. These are what are used to install deb files, which are the binary packages used on Debian and Debian based systems like Ubuntu”
You have just pointed out exactly why Linux is not a viable desktop for most people. The average user won’t understand:
front-end
dpkg
Debian
deb files
binary packages
FAIL
You have just pointed out exactly why Linux is not a viable desktop for most people. The average user won’t understand:
front-end
dpkg
Debian
deb files
binary packages
FAIL
The average user doesn't need to know that Synaptic is a front end to dpkg any more than they need to know that Internet Explorer uses winsock.dll. Nor does their lack of "understanding" of a binary package mean that they use it any more or less on Linux than on Windows. The poster was just volunteering a little knowledge for its own sake to a user that is presumably using Synaptic without issue. For that he "FAILs"?
Wow. You're right, with standards like that, any OS is doomed to "FAILure"
front-end
dpkg
Debian
deb files
binary packages
Perhaps if they are going to use it, they should learn something about it. A little due diligence goes a long way.
You have just pointed out exactly why Linux is not a viable desktop for most people.
You may be right, but I have a feeling that such is actually not so. Consider that the poster I responded to is an Ubuntu user but was completely unaware of how his packages got installed, or what tools did it. Now, I will admit that I am a bit surprised that such would happen, but that it does should indicate that not knowing anything about the system does not actually mean you cannot use it. Windows, for instance, uses binary files and has front-end tools, and many other applications with fancy names too, like MSCONFIG, but most people don't have to know them. The same is possible with Linux too, though less common I will grant.