• CubitOom@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’d argue it’s better to use actual alternatives. Half of the issue with free and open source software is that it’s userbase is too small. If more people used it, it could actually improve in many ways.

    Lets take gaming on Linux as an example. The userbase on steam is somewhere around 5%. So there is almost no incentive for developers to make games that run nativly on Linux. Its actually easier to run the games in a compatibility layer then to get a Linux port of a game. And although wine and proton work incredibly well, sometimes even running a game better than on windows; a Linux native version of every game would be ideal. Which will never happen with such a small userbase.

    Next you have the terrible business practices of these companies. Even if you use the pirated versions. You are in their ecosystem and their community. You increase their profitability and their stock price simply by continuing the industry standard.

    Pirated versions of software like this is excusable if you need it for work or sometihing. But imagine if instead of staying with the status quo, you use and help improve actual free and open source alternatives. Versons of software that don’t steal your data or monetize how you use it by selling your input to others or stealing it for “AI” datasets.

    Imagine using free and open source software that gives you feedom because your data stays on your devices, your creations belong to only yourself or who ypu choose to share it with, and you work with others to improve it; even if it’s by just submitting bug reports. Imagine using something like that which you find so altruisticly beneficial that instead of pirating the software that has no respect for you, you donate money to the devs of free and open source software. Yes, I’m a pirate. But I do donate money to the right causes and something that protects my freedom is worth both my time and my money.

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    free* as in beer, not as in speech. we still don’t really own it.

  • idegenszavak@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    No, they are not free, they are gratis alternatives.

    “Free software” is one term, and it’s meaning was defined in 1986 by RMS. Non of these software existed that time.

    The word “free” in our name does not refer to price; it refers to freedom. First, the freedom to copy a program and redistribute it to your neighbors, so that they can use it as well as you. Second,** the freedom to change a program, so that you can control it instead of it controlling you; for this, the source code must be made available to you.**

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      5 months ago

      You’re acting like he invented the word “free”.

      He doesn’t get to hijack and redefine it, and his redefinition is not any kind of objective reality.

      • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        You’re right, the first amendment wasn’t about freedom of expression, it was about not having to pay for books.

        Using the word free to describe something that doesn’t restrict you has been a thing for centuries. “Free Software” has been the accepted term within the software world to denote freedom respecting, libre, and open source software since the 80’s.

        This isn’t about because Richard Stallman said so. Its because its the definition pretty much everyone, especially those who’ve actually touched a compiler, uses.

          • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            You’d maybe have a point if this was made up today, or even 10 years ago, but this was settled during the early years of the industry. Free software is free as in freedom, freeware is gratis but not free.

            This is established industry jargon, and has been for over two fucking decades. Not really sure why its being argued.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              5 months ago

              There is no one with the authority to make that determination.

              “Free” as in “no fee” has been heavily used the entire time people have tried to steal the definition to only apply to license terms, it has always been objectively correct, and it is literally impossible for it to ever not be objectively correct.

              • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                it is literally impossible for it to ever not be objectively correct

                And yet here you are, using “literally” to mean “figuratively.” Excuse me for not accepting your linguistic authority on the immutability of other words.

                • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  No, I absolutely am not. There is no path to any future where someone will be wrong to use the word “free” to describe software that doesn’t cost anything.

                  Meanings fall out of use (which hasn’t happened here) They don’t become invalidated. They’re not capable of becoming invalidated.

              • drcobaltjedi@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another

                Merriam webster dictionary definition 2D.

                That is a definition people use when discussing libre software. The software is under YOUR control. If adobe says “fuck you, you don’t get the brush tool anymore” thats it for the brush tool. If gimp gets rid of a feature in the main branch, you can say “no fuck you I like this tool” and can just keep the code base that included it still.

                Also you have a rather perscriptive understanding of language, which just simply isn’t how language works. Languages evolve over time. Open up a dictionary and see how many definitions are listed as antiquated. Those are definitions that aren’t used anymore as they fell out of favor.

                Now get off your high horse about how words aren’t the same as they used to be or how words are frozen to definitions.

                • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Also you have a rather perscriptive understanding of language

                  Lol wtf are you talking about? No they don’t. Everyone telling them they are wrong is being prescriptive. All they are doing is saying “it’s not wrong to use a word according to an incredibly common definition of that word”. Which is precisely the opposite of prescriptive.

                • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  I’m not opposing people calling that software free.

                  I’m saying that you are wrong (and an asshole) every single time you correct someone calling any software without a price tag free. Because that definition is also correct, long before some deluded douche tried to lay exclusive claim to it. The “free software can only mean open source” people are the ones ignoring what the word actually means (and has always meant) in the real world. They’re trying to own language and take away correct usages to service their own agendas.

                  Free software meant “no charge” before he pulled that nonsense ideological claim to the word. It meant it after he tried to own the word. And it still means it today. Multiple uses of the same word are fine. Trying to invalidate correct usage is not.

      • idegenszavak@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        He speaks about free in “free software”. not a general meaning.

        But the meme says “free software” and implies that the real “free software” alternatives (linux, gimp, blender and friends) are shitty, and they are used only because of their price. These are not “free software” alternatives, but gratis software alternatives, or freeware alternatives. that is my problem.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          5 months ago

          There’s no such thing.

          The general meanings were already applied to software before he shouted to the heavens that he owned the term. Any valid use of the word free is exactly as correct when applied to software.

    • Freeman@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      As a german speaking person: Shut up and stop using german translations of words as if it has a different meaning. It gives me Angst.

      (Edit: explanation down in the comments, I am aware that “gratis” isn’t exclusively german)

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What German word was used there? Are you suggesting gratis is German? Maybe it is, but it’s also English. And we didn’t even borrow it from German. It’s Latin.

      • vsis@feddit.cl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        As a spanish/romance speaking person: ahahahah LOL!

        Where do you thing “gratis” and “libre” come from?

        • krippix@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          gratis means free, but only in the sense that it dosen‘t cost money. So it seems like a valid use for the word.

          Is there an english equivalent?

          • idegenszavak@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            5 months ago

            Gratis and libre used usually to differenciate the terms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre

            Both of them are latin words so I expect they show up in similar forms in most European languages. Free is a Germanic origin word.

            In Hungarian we use the word Gratis as well with Hungarian spelling: “Grátisz” even though Hungarian is not an Indo-European language. Libre is not used in common speech here.

            I don’t get what @Freeman@lemmings.world wanted to say

            • Freeman@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I find it very confusing when german words are used to mean something different that their english counterparts.

              So in english: free ≠ gratis ≠ libre fear ≠ Angst car ≈ Auto (i heard it used for a car with a automatic transmission and also a few years ago as a term for a selfdriving car)

              But also the other way around In Swiss-German: Bus ≠ Car (First one being a trolleybus in a city, second one a bus that takes a schoolclass on a trip.)

              I am aware that words like “gratis” or “auto” are not exclusive to german, I guess that gave me the downvotes.

          • ccdfa@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Gratuitous can be used to mean the same thing, but English speakers also use gratis

          • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Is there an english equivalent?

            Yes: “gratis”.

            English is literally about mugging other languages in a backalley for words (and boning them for grammar). It’s the ISO standard procedure.

  • shadowsrayn@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    5 months ago

    Pirating a software still shows a company that there is interest in it. They will only know they are screwed when people stop buying and stop pirating

  • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Wrong. I and other devs can modify free software to make it work on Linux. You can’t do that with Photoshop and Premiere

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      But you don’t need it to run on linux if you’re using a personally stripped down LTSC Windows install activated for free using massgrave.

      More seriously, two different meanings of free going on here.

      • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Good luck running a tiling WM like Hyprland with a wonderful Terminal emulator like Foot or Kitty, with a customisable file manager like Thunar or Krusader, with a terminal music player like CMUS…

        I can keep on going. But the TLDR is that it’s MY setup not Microsoft’s.

    • jaschen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      Gimp is terrible. The UX is bad, the whole project just seems like an afterthought

      • electricprism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I used to feel that way about it 10+ years.

        If you haven’t used it in a while (1y+) don’t even bother with the 2.10.xx – I use Krita, GIMP, Inkscape – did some image editing in GIMP yesterday and it went good.

        Since the latter 2.99.xx releases my position & criticisms have changed. New UX, Non-destructive Layer Filters and the workflow has improved the software a lot. There is a ton of activity on their gitlab.

        Its still not perfect but easily beats Photoshop Wine at all basic operations.

        https://www.gimp.org/news/2024/02/21/gimp-2-99-18-released/

        And since this post is about Photoshop. Don’t pirate it. Be the change in the world you want to see. Let Adobe Rot in Pieces for decades of being anti Linux and anti FOSS despite popular demand and big Hollywood bucks.

        Make them a relic of a long forgotten decade. The sooner we can move on the better.

        • jaschen@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I actually haven’t used Gimp for at least 2 years so I might try it again. My work gives me adobe CC so I use it there. I wouldn’t mind trying it again for personal.

          I know adobe is the devil, but you simply can’t beat PS for UX and UI. Even their hot keying is far better than GIMP(back in the day, maybe).

          • electricprism@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Yeah I totally agree, I love Photoshop UX colors and general function. It’s been a while though.

            On the other hand GIMP has a HUD command palette with hotkey / and you can search for all image functions which is fine with me as I use my keeb a lot.

            And I did import PS hotkeys to go with my many years of memory and it helped me feel at home much better.

            I have used many image editors over the years and I can at least say for basic functions, cropping, scaling, art it opens fast compared to wine and the pre 3.x UI is so much nicer to use.

            I would definitely not recommend a cold switch for anyone at a job, the transition would be frustrating and problematic. But learning the “life raft” as a backup seems sensible.

            It was a hard hit to my ego going from a PS God back to a peasant in terms of output, but I’d say the last few years the tooling has improved tremendously and I can say I’m a novice or mid tier photo editor in GIMP.

            The text tool is nowhere as robust as PS, I felt like PS was a all in one printer one stop shop. But then there’s Inkscape so I am okay with dividing my functions up among a few tools instead of only 1.

            I’ve designed concepts for houses in GIMP as weird as that may seem.

            God do I hate 2.8 and 2.10 UX it was soo bad in terms of getting out of my way and an embarrassment at work, 2.99.xx thankfully is light years apart.

            Edit: Also the GEGL non destructive fx stuff is really interesting and G’MIC Qt addon filters

            • jaschen@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’ll def give it a try again. I manage website performance and run AB tests and have to chop my own images. So it’s not terribly demanding. So maybe it can help me transition

    • 4wd@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      DaVinci is kind of broken on GNU/Linux, it has audio lags and is missing some codecs.

  • verstra@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I wouldn’t say that Linux & Gimp are objectively better, but they sure are better in the long run, since you plop “gimp” into a nix configuration and never have to deal with installation and cracking.

    • Virkkunen@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      For most use cases of Photoshop, GIMP is not an alternative at all. For more basic use cases it is, but st that point you shouldn’t be wasting efforts on Photoshop anyways, something like Paint.NET would be the recommended.

      The closest we have for any Adobe alternatives are Affinity Photo for Photoshop, but that one is not free nor open source, but it’s a lifetime pay once license. For some use cases of Photoshop and Illustrator you could use Krita, which is FOSS, and for Premiere there’s DaVinci resolve, which has Linux builds and a free version.

      • Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        For most use cases of Photoshop, GIMP is not an alternative at all.

        Have you used GIMP seriously? And I don’t mean installing it, getting confused because the menu layout is different to Photoshop and giving up in disgust after 10 mins.

        I will readily admit that Photoshop is currently more capable and faster in some cases but to say GIMP is not an alternative is ridiculous.

        • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m not the person you replied to, I don’t use Photoshop, but I used to use GIMP exclusively and I use the Affinity suite now. What I’ve seen pop up in discussions about a major area where GIMP is lacking, going back several years at this point:

          Photoshop supports nondestructive editing, and Affinity supports nondestructive RAW editing (and even outside RAW editing, it still supports things like filter layers). Heck, my understanding is Krita has support for nondestructive editing, too.

          GIMP, on the other hand, has historically only had destructive editing. It looks like they finally added an initial implementation back in February. That’s great, and once GIMP 3.0 releases and that feature is fully supported, then GIMP will be a viable alternative for workflows that require it.

          • Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yes, bring on 3.0! I checked out the development release and layer effects are working well. Happy days for us :)

            Apparently there are some major colour upgrades coming in 3.0 too, so good news for printing.

        • Virkkunen@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes I have, but GIMP simply isn’t aimed at the same type of work Photoshop and AF Photo are. GIMP feels much more of a hobbyist tool to quickly make a simple edit and that’s done. And like the other comment said, it has no non-destructive editing at all, which is an enormous dealbreaker for any kind of professional work you might do.

          • Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            but GIMP simply isn’t aimed at the same type of work Photoshop and AF Photo are

            Look at the home page of GIMP’s website, where it says “Whether you are a graphic designer, photographer, illustrator, or scientist, GIMP provides you with sophisticated tools to get your job done.” If it’s not aimed at the same things photoshop and affinity are then what is it aimed at? Music production? Video editing?

            GIMP feels much more of a hobbyist tool to quickly make a simple edit and that’s done.

            Why then are there so many transformation tools and filters and channel, selection and vector operations, icc profile management, scripting, etc etc etc? Just because you haven’t learnt how to do something in GIMP doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

            And like the other comment said, it has no non-destructive editing at all

            This point has been valid for a long time unfortunately, however GIMP does now have non-destructive editing. You can check it out in their development version.

            I know you and me are not going to agree on this but I think it’s important to update and debunk misinformed statements, for the benefit of others.

            • IllIIllIllIIIIl@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              I used to make graphic art in Paint.net myself, anyone who thinks photoshop has anything special is objectively wrong (we’re going to ignore generative AI tools)

              The benefit of photoshop is that’s its more refined in what it does, not that it does anything extra that these foss tools can’t do.

              The tooling has years of iteration by paid developers and there are a shitload of high quality presets and brushes and, again, refined use case specific stuff, but yeah GIMP is just as viable as a software to achieve most of what photoshop users online who shit talk it can do. The only people whose opinion even matters is professionals who require photoshop to make money for their bills. Everyone else is just blowing smoke out their ass about it because they think having a better tool automatically makes them better.

      • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Just to note here, resolve is also much better than premier, even the free version. Considering the Adobe pricing, buying studio for $300 is a better decision imo.

        kdenlive is solid for the simple cut/fade type of work.

        I’d also add something I’ve mentioned elsewhere for pictures - in case of raws, paint.net is ok, but imo darktable+krita is a much better experience.

        • brownmustardminion@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          +1. Resolve is leaps and bounds ahead of Premiere and even After Effects when you consider Resolve has Fusion built in. I work on high level projects and often run into huge issues trying to work with Premiere projects. Most editors still use it simply because it was the first NLE they picked up. It lacks proper color management and its ability to export out to other software whether for post audio, color, or VFX is abysmal. I switched to Resolve about 5 years ago and while it isn’t without its faults, I’ll take it over Adobe bullshit any day. Sometimes I have to open editors premiere files to troubleshoot and I want to blow my brains out. Easily can wipe out an entire day just troubleshooting premiere projects. It’s funny because when I first got into the industry I was using Premiere and they were trying to push me to use Avid. I felt the same way about Avid as I currently feel about premiere.

        • Virkkunen@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          As far as I know it doesn’t, even with Wine/Proton. I mean, you can get it to run, but not properly and it’s very unstable, not usable at all so far.

  • Bianca_0089@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I use Krita because I do hand drawn animation so I haven’t pirated photoshop since like . . 2008. Also use a tiltpen with it to paint tangent normals for bump mapping sometimes. Once I obtained good drawing tablets and stopped painting with my mouse I stopped caring about photoshop and its features

  • OfficerBribe@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    You don’t even have to pirate Windows. Without activation everything will work besides some customization (I think you could not change wallpaper) which you can easily bypass if you would really wish to.

    • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I couldn’t switch to dark theme before it recognised my laptop’s activation key. I’m sorry to be petty, but I’m not going to sit here being flashbanged

    • 4wd@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Using a system where they won’t even let you change the wallpaper is some special form of perversion.

  • Ramin Honary@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    How can you pirate Photoshop and Elements? They are WebAssembly binaries that phone home before you are allowed to use them.

  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    If one of the steps was leaking the source code then you could say that. Though who knows maybe AI reverse engineering will get good enough that we’ll soon be able to turn the assembly code back into C++ or C. Then you can port the software to whatever you like.

    With assembly you’re very much limited to the hardware it targeted and without a huge amount of work the operating system that it targeted as well.

  • Kedly@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is my stance to people who have the Epic Games Launcher for the free games… Fuckin Black Flag is cleaner ethically than Epic Games

      • Jack Riddle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        Linux is compatible with almost all windows software now, and windows is absolutely not more user friendly, it’s just what you’re used to.

        • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I guess some of us are more astute when it comes to the difference between clicking something and needing to open a terminal and remember strings of commands before. Oh, and being intrinsically familiar with a forum.

          • Jack Riddle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            For a lot of distro’s you don’t need to use a terminal to install things if you aren’t comfortable with that. While I believe learning to use a commandline a little bit will always be beneficial, you really don’t havo to. Take a look at linux mint for example, which has a “store” for packages.

            • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              When I used Mint, I found I’d typically get outdated versions when downloading software from the “store”, sometimes to the extent that it outright wouldn’t work. It was because of that I found myself needing to learn to use Terminal.

        • LazerDickMcCheese@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Install windows software: download the exe or msi and click OK 2 or 3 times

          Install Linux software: you got at least 40hrs to learn terminal commands to install dependencies n shit? I fucking don’t, that’s not what user-friendly looks like to 90% of the planet

          • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Pretty much everything is available in a package manager, flatpaks, etc.

            If you’re at the point of building from source, I don’t think you’re in regular user territory to start with.

          • Jack Riddle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            It’s clear you haven’t used linux.

            Windows: open edge, go to google, type the package you want, scroll past ads, download random executable from internet, execute, click through wizard, open program.

            Linux: open package manager, search package you want, click install, open program.

          • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            commands to install dependencies n shit

            That only happens if you are fixated on installing the software without connecting to the internet.
            Otherwise, the package manager does it for you (that’s what its job is)

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Thought you were talking about Linux at first.

        I use both Windows, Linux, and macOS - my opinion is that Windows is the least user-friendly of the bunch.