"Works for me (TM)"

Linux Desktop Evangelism playbook hasn't changed since 2000.

How is it different than "Doesn't work for me TM"

The linux fanboy definition of works is either works out of the box or can be made to work.

The opposite position seems to be must work out of the box on any of 50 distros on any hardware I buy at Walmart AND must invent time travel to change the fact that it didn't work 7 years ago on the Acer I bought from that weirdo on Craigslist the only time I actually tried installing it.

Take High DPI

It kinda looks like cinnamon for example supports HiDPI out of the box but all the knobs are there if you want to tweak how different things scale.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/HiDPI

If on your distro something isn't configured correctly for 4k screens the fanboy says its workable because there is a readily available resource that will tell you how to achieve the result you desire.

The anti fanboy will throw up their hands and say Linux sucks.

An argument can be made that that this isn't good enough for "grandma" or "regular people". I see problems in consumer electronics and windows that are too hard for grandma or "regular people" all the time.

If they don't want to install and configure it presumably they can pay Lenovo or Dell to do it for them just as they do presently. If it comes with a high dpi screen presumably they will configure it for such.

> If on your distro something isn't configured correctly for 4k screens the fanboy says its workable because there is a readily available resource that will tell you how to achieve the result you desire.

> The anti fanboy will throw up their hands and say Linux sucks.

This is a strange false dichotomy

I think the implication was that it isn't a dichotomy. There is a third group of people who are neither fanboys nor anti fanboys.

Perhaps I should have said hater. Yes there is a massive group in the middle that doesn't have a dog in the race only techies and nerds have favorite OS like other people have sports teams. On average people are buying boxes that come with software and using whatever came with their box.

Because it's the only retort to the unfalsifiable 'it doesn't work for me'.

Anybody who uses Windows 10 with any regularity will also run into things that just do not work: for me, recently, it's Windows deciding that I want my sound to output to my monitor (which doesn't have speakers). The only reason Windows issues are treated differently to Linux's is that it's treated as the default.

Your monitor might have an audio out port. That's why my monitor is the default sound output when I have my Mac connected.

It doesn't sound like a Windows bug unless your monitor is actually incapable of outputting sound at all. In that case, I'd wager your monitor is advertising sound when it has none.

I'm not saying that Windows bugs don't exist (I've run into lots), but I'm guessing that this isn't a Windows bug.

It doesn't what my monitor does: I disable the output to it in Windows every time. And every time, Windows re-enables it.

That does sound like a Windows bug. In that case, disregard my previous message.

You can't be Windows user on Linux.

At least in this issue someone resolved the problem. That's good signal, Linux user would ask how - hardware, distribution, tutorials, links etc.

You see ignorance. It is not about him, it is about you.

A friend of mine who is a sw developer who worked on Linux for years got a 4K display and then switched to Windows because many apps don’t play well with resolution scaling.

Did he use a “full featured” DE? From what I’ve seen, if you are not on KDE or Gnome, scaling support is normally up to yourself.

Every time someone says "[basic feature] does not work on Linux", someone else comes and says it's always worked fine for him. I'm not saying you are lying, but you are probably in a minority. I've also had problems with scaling on Linux and I gave up on it. Also, having two screens with different scaling was completely unsupported, unlike on Windows.

> someone else comes and says it's always worked fine for him. I'm not saying you are lying, but you are probably in a minority.

Here's my "secret," if it helps. I buy laptops with Linux pre-installed from a supported vendor, I run Ubuntu LTS in the default configuration, and I only customize a tiny number of things. This has worked pretty well for me for over a decade. (Before that, I had more issues.)

I don't feel like installing Linux onto random Windows laptops is a good use of my time. Similarly, if I were to choose some unusual distro or desktop environment, that would usually mean more hassle. So I don't.

> Also, having two screens with different scaling was completely unsupported, unlike on Windows.

Yup, that's the biggest limitation I've seen. That's one reason I ended up giving away my ancient external monitor and getting a new 4k. That way I can use the same scaling on the internal and external monitor.

And if I'm going to make a major hardware purchase, I usually Google to see if it works with Linux. This matters mostly for things like drawing tablets.

The most probable difference between these two people is that the first one installs Linux on a supported hardware (or buys preinstalled Linux), while the second one takes their random hardware and expects that Linux will work on it flawlessly.

Why do you assume they’re a minority? If every time someone mentions something didn’t work, 10 other people explain that it can actually work, maybe that should be telling you something different.

Because a lot of people don't report that it doesn't work, they just stop using things that don't work. Those that do report it get "Works for me (TM)!" --or perhaps "Try a different distro (TM)!"-- in response instead of anything helpful, so why bother?

Even someone like me has long since stopped reporting bugs to Linux Desktop projects because of the above, and the fact that a lot of times the bug is already in the issue tracker and has been for years so clearly no one gives a damn anyway.

People respond like that because they genuinely have been using Linux desktops for decades, and have been perfectly productive using them for work and play. And then someone posts something like 'I tried installing Ubuntu but thing X didn't work, how can anyone do real work on this joke operating system? I stopped using it immediately' and they just want to provide a different perspective.

Personally I bought a highly-recommended Windows laptop a few years ago and had to stop using the OS because both sleep and the Intel wifi drivers simply didn't work. Yet if I tried to use that experience to proclaim that that Windows was a non-functional, useless operating system developed by people who don't give a damn, I would not be taken seriously.

By the way have you considered what reporting bugs like this for Windows is like? You end up on one of those Microsoft support sites staffed by non-technical non-employee Community Experts who have absolutely nothing useful to add. Talking to real driver and OS developers directly on Linux bug reports is magical in comparison.

> People respond like that because they genuinely have been using Linux desktops for decades, and have been perfectly productive using them for work and play. And then someone posts something like 'I tried installing Ubuntu but thing X didn't work, how can anyone do real work on this joke operating system? I stopped using it immediately' and they just want to provide a different perspective.

...because they have entangled their identity with their OS of choice such that they interpret "I had a problem with this and therefore don't use it" as some kind of personal attack. This is not only unhelpful, but an actively repellent behavior.

> Personally I bought a Windows laptop a few years ago and had to stop using the OS because both sleep and the Intel wifi drivers simply didn't work. Yet if I tried to use that experience to proclaim that that Windows was a non-functional, useless operating system developed by people who don't give a damn, I would not be taken seriously.

Case in point, who is saying Linux is useless? Useless for their particular use case or workflow, sure. Even people who like Windows generally, like myself, say the developers don't give a damn (see some of my other posts on the subject). Fact is, a lot of use would love to be using an OSS system, but the community actively fights us when we have issues with their stuff and their echo chamber of "our way is the best way!" remains unbreached, so our use cases and workflows are never accommodated and we, consequently, can't use it. This has been going on for about 20 years now. It's pretty damned tiring.

> By the way have you considered what reporting bugs like this for Windows is like?

I work supporting Windows systems, so I know how useless Microsoft support is. You know what I don't get when I talk about a Windows issue with other Windows admins though? "Well it works fine here..."

> Talking to real driver and OS developers directly on Linux bug reports is magical in comparison.

Sure, if they listen, which they often don't. Spend some time in Ubuntu's issue tracker if you don't believe me.

I have noticed Ubuntu and Fedora's bug trackers often seem to have ignored and longstanding bug reports. I think part of the problem is there is a layer of indirection - the developers of the packages themselves don't look there.

>they interpret "I had a problem with this and therefore don't use it" as some kind of personal attack. This is not only unhelpful, but an actively repellent behavior.

Your posts so far have implied that people reporting their positive experience or advising how to make the most of Linux (eg being careful about hardware choice) must be doing so because of a kind of identity crisis, or that they are reciting from mockable 'Linux Desktop Evangelism playbook'. Meanwhile you seem to have taken personal offence at the 'community's (as if it's one entity) response to your Ubuntu bug tracker entry.

My point exactly. If you report something like this on the Ubuntu bug tracker, your bug will be gathering dust forever. If you are (un)lucky some bug triager who has absolutely no knowledge of coding or the systems involved will ask you for logs that are useless to the problem at hand, and that will be it.

It doesn't matter who is in the minority. If even 1% of Linux desktop installs have issues, quirks or plain failures, it's a problem for all of Linux as that 1% chance of failure becomes a first impression, or a horror story a product manager can't unhear.

Having said that, I'm also generally in the boat of having an unpleasant experience installing on various laptops. Doesn't stop me from trying every year or so though, ha.

Have you considered buying a laptop with linux at some point?

If you're just asking me personally - absolutely I have! I had to sell my MacBook because of the pandemic and I deeply miss my i3-clone yaourt.

I'm running regolith with i3 using an X server on my WSL 2 install. It even has GPU passthrough now! It's been super pleasant experience having the best of both worlds without having to reboot.

If you're asking to make a point, I'll just say that it takes a level of tech savvy to even know _how_ to find a Linux laptop that runs smoothly. That is the problem I'm referring to.

The best logical answer would be to buy something that comes with linux after reading a review to ensure that it meets your needs.

Right that's gonna be my strategy going forward. I should have mentioned I had to stick with windows on my gaming rig because I don't currently have the money for a new laptop.

I've heard Dell and the Thinkpads work well with Linux. Got any other suggestions?