What if websites decide that chrome users earn much more ad revenue and start forcing users to switch with those “This website only supports Chrome” error messages? What if this practice gets popular? I’m sure there are ways to get around it, but the average users who bothered switching to Firefox at all, will just conclude that anything except chrome has a bad browsing experience.

No motives whatsoever? Was his brain on vacation or smth?

On top of being preinstalled, we also need google search-able instructions that avoid the terminal altogether. People are afraid of the terminal, it doesn’t matter why, it just is.

Currently, most solutions to linux problems come in the form of terminal commands. We would have to start creating a whole new troubleshooting forum where instructions avoid the terminal and are just lists of buttons to press in a GUI. Probably helpful screenshots too.

Of course I have no idea if some things even have GUIs at all, like configuring user groups and permissions or firewall settings, someone would need to make them. Not to mention every DE or program would need a different set of instructions, GNOME or KDE, firewalld or iptables. It’ll be a lot of work.

I used gnome though. IIRC, everything to do with customising GNOME is done through extensions, and all extensions have GUI settings menus.

My point being, even though it’s objectively harder to customise GNOME, it still doesn’t require using the terminal.

What exact GUI controls does linux lack that windows doesn’t?

It went great. I mostly had to submit files in PDF, which allowed any office software to work perfectly.

That is until covid came around and I had to do proctored online exams. The proctoring software doesn’t support linux.

deleted by creator

Oh nice. My parent’s doorbell is a wireless one and I thought it was a trick. That they hid the battery and sold it with false advertising.

What about finger guns? Like using your index finger and thumb as a gun. That’s violent behaviour.

I’m clearly approaching this from the point of view of language as a means to communicate and connect with people, while you see language as something that has to bring you clear benefits. I went to the trouble of writing a whole ass paragraph about how Chinese is not a single country language and there are several countries worth of people outside the firewall using it. Of course no other language under the sun will ever compare to English in terms of practical usefulness, but it’s as good as it’s going to be for a second language, up there with French and Spanish maybe. You don’t have to assume everyone who disagrees is offended.

People forget, but China itself has a population of 1.4 billion people. That’s at least 4 times the population of the US, you never run out of people to talk to in Chinese. Not to mention, there is also Taiwan and Hong Kong, and several countries around Asia that host significantly large racially Chinese diaspora, such as Malaysia or Singapore. I’m not talking about recent Chinese immigrants, but people who have been living there for generations and have never stepped foot in China.

Language is for communicating with people, it’s a rather narrow view to only see the business use for languages. If anyone wants to pick up a second language, Chinese is as good as it’s going to get. You aren’t limited to 1.4 billion communists to talk to with your Chinese skills, try a Taiwanese or Chinese Malaysian or smth.

You might be 40 years too late with that keyboard comment. Which major language still exists today with no easy way to type with a keyboard?