I’m running Kubuntu with the Plasma desktop. Fast and fancy. Instead of the Mac copy cat docker at the bottom, I have a left panel with all my commonly used apps. My task bar is at the top rather than the bottom.
I’m running Kubuntu with the Plasma desktop. Fast and fancy. Instead of the Mac copy cat docker at the bottom, I have a left panel with all my commonly used apps. My task bar is at the top rather than the bottom.
Sounds like each of those "Linux distributions" is a slick, highly customizable UI running on top of a Unix kernel variant. The customization possibilities make it seem like it's the Android of the PC world, I guess. Why would a satisfied macOS or Windows user even consider the onerous task of switching to a Linux distribution, given all the apps and software suites they use on their current OS platform? macOS and Windows users benefit from a single, very stable, reputable OS/UI vendor - Apple or Microsoft. Why take a chance on a Linux distribution (which I assume are all open source, I could be wrong about that)? I further assume you must buy the Linux kernel from one vendor, the UI from another vendor, and apps and software suites from a bunch of other vendors. Are they as dependable as macOS and Windows vendors? I also assume if one did the switch to Linux, they'd have to dump all their current apps and software suites and buy new versions (or entirely different apps and suites) for Linux. That doesn't seem worth the effort and cost, unless Linux totally blows away macOS and Windows. AFAIK, Windows has a huge dominant market share and macOS a decent market share, whereas Linux's market share is much smaller. That generally implies Linux OS, UI, app, and software suite vendors are much smaller and thus more likely to go out of business. So why are some people so excited about Linux distributions? What am I missing?