It's certainly the case that OSX, at least, has gotten flaky as heck, but at the same time: What's the competition?
While Apple was releasing Yosemite, Microsoft was going down the Windows 8 rabbit-hole, releasing the worst version of Windows since ME. And while desktop Linux has been getting better over time, I don't think anyone would say that it "Just Works" yet.
The only desktop/laptop OS that actually does "Just Work" is ChromeOS; and while that's a wonderful experience for its use cases, there are still plenty of situations that it's not great for.
And while desktop Linux has been getting better over time, I don't think anyone would say that it "Just Works" yet.
The true test for a system isn't so much whether it "just works" -- the closest you'll ever get will be "mostly works" especially as you dive deeper into the rabbit hole, but rather how observable and debuggable it is once the inevitable "doesn't work" moment appears.
Because, for all purposes, GNU/Linux reached the average user threshold a long time ago. The majority of complaints boil down to hardware support, but this is the survival bias in action -- you're totally ignoring the hoops the OEM had to go through to run Windows, and that trying to install Windows images on heterogenous hardware won't fare that much better. Some complain of installation failures, and I think this is a result of ignorance from people using all those convenient liveCD/USB makers like UNetbootin which actually overwrite the bootloader configuration and thus may break lots of images.
Windows 8 has been solid (Except people don't like the GUI)
Windows 10 gives you the start button back (I don't like start buttons)
Linux - There really are good use cases for Linux. Your's might fit this one. Works for me and I dual boot for the odd time I need another OS (About twice a quarter)
Chromebook - Limited to "normal" users workflow cases.
The whole Metro UI stunt was a mistake, It should never have happened. I'm really curious about who's to blame for that stuff, I don't think it's Sinofsky, because it's just so stupid. But at the same time there is very little difference between 7 and 8 so why would anyone want to buy yet another license ? That's the problem right here with Windows. Worse it looks like they removed some features from 7 to 10. Aside from gamers who always need yet another version of directx frankly it becomes harder and harder to justify the cost of Windows for each new computer bought.
Yeah, I'm also curious how 8 happened. I think it may have been some institutional committee type effect because it seems to dumb for a smart individual to do. It didn't really effect me because I just skipped 8 but three of my friends / family who don't follow tech bought a new computer unaware of what Microsoft had done and were shocked / horrified to find things didn't work as before. My cousin figured it took him about 100 hours to get some stuff working again and the other two basically stopped using their computers. It was particually painful with my dad whos 80ish and slowing down a bit but who could use 7 but who was unable to work 8. I have lasting resentment to Microsoft over that - the amount of pain and inconvenience they caused their regular users. And for what? I think the brilliant reasoning was if they force people to use a phone interface on their computers they'll be used to that interface and buy windows phones and tablets. That worked out well for them with the recent $7.6 bn write off on Nokia and presumably lots of well meaning employees losing their jobs. At least the new management seem to have returned to trying to treat their customers well rather than inflicting unpopular stuff in a misguided attempt to get more money.
> While Apple was releasing Yosemite, Microsoft was going down the Windows 8 rabbit-hole, releasing the worst version of Windows since ME. And while desktop Linux has been getting better over time, I don't think anyone would say that it "Just Works" yet.
While Ubuntu wasn't taking the Windows 8 disaster seriously and focused with wasting time on mobile.
I've suggested ChromeOS to family members that use facebook, email, and limited spreadsheets. Ultimately, I backtracked when they asked about printing. Telling them they have to buy a new printer that's Cloud Print compatible is a tough sell, especially if they've purchased one within the last year.
I have found that Chrome Boxes are excellent machines for demoing web products at tradeshows. Cheap, relatively hardened, fast enough, and sync bookmarks and settings.
You can actually setup any machine as a Cloud Print server (i.e. publishing its own printers as Cloud Print capable printers) so long as it can run Chrome or Chromium. Even a Raspberry Pi will do the trick: http://www.howtogeek.com/169566/how-to-turn-a-raspberry-pi-i...
You can run a bridge, but then it's another machine to set up and maintain. How are security and Chrome updates handled? A cron job? What if that fails? Suddenly the simple Chromebook is more complex.
I wouldn't mind running that hack myself, but there's no way I'd drop it on someone who couldn't debug if something went wrong.
> but there's no way I'd drop it on someone who couldn't debug if something went wrong.
One approach I've done to make things more debuggable (not for this specific setup, but for Unix-running home servers in general) is to SSH in (I used to - with the user's permission, of course - setup forwarding of port 22 on the user's router/gateway/etc., but nowadays I usually setup a remote tunneling script that the user can kickoff somehow). I also tend to build systems that run for months - if not years - without any maintenance, so there's that, too :)
Still doesn't address the "another machine to set up and maintain" issue, but if I did my job right, it would be as inconspicuous as a wall clock.
I wasn't aware (it's admittedly been a long time since I've done this; nowadays I just run a central CUPS server to drive my printers); thanks for the much better link.
> I have found that Chrome Boxes are excellent machines for demoing web products at tradeshows. Cheap, relatively hardened, fast enough, and sync bookmarks and settings.
I just don't see what's so hard about desktop Linux at this point. In the last 3-4 years, I've installed various Ubuntu flavours on hardware varying in vintage from 2005 to 2012-ish, with no problems, every bit of hardware just working. In 2012 I even put puppy on a Toshiba laptop from roughly 2000, that wqas still going strong-ish with Windows 98 (!) but could obviously not run any browsers newer than IE6 or whatever it was. No problems. Compared to when I was first dabbling with Debian in the mid-oughts, it's no more hassle - in fact, less hassle - than installing Windows in my experience. To be clear - I am doing little or no customisation at all (beyond obviously installing stuff that I need). I expect it to Just Work. And it does.
Whether the slightly rough-and-ready replacements for essential consumer apps are suitable is another matter. GIMP is obviously no Photoshop.
My experience of using OSX on a daily basis is that I use very little of the Apple specific stuff, and that I need 16gb in there because it leaks memory like billy-o. My awful code does enough of that without Apple helping out, thank you very much.
If you've installed it a lot, you know how to make it work when it doesn't work.
Usually the first install is fine for me with Ubuntu, but then I need something, like two different programs to be able to play sound at the same time.
I recently transitioned from OSX to elementary OS (an ubuntu-based distro).
For me it's the best compromise. I can't really stand Windows, I've tried for years to get comfortable with it, but I've always found it full of bad decisions which make for a very uncomfortable experience.
Linux is still not up to speed in terms of software you can get and hardware compatibility, but I've found it to still be the best option (although I keep a Win8 partition for games).
It really depends on what software you need to run, though.
>The only desktop/laptop OS that actually does "Just Work" is ...
I find you can get much more of a 'just works' experience by ignoring the latest shiniest and using the debugged version of a couple of years back. I'm running Mavericks on the Mac and 7 on the pc and have very few issues with either. At the other extreme I tried ios8 beta when that first came out and everything was broken. It takes a while to debug stuff.
While Apple was releasing Yosemite, Microsoft was going down the Windows 8 rabbit-hole, releasing the worst version of Windows since ME. And while desktop Linux has been getting better over time, I don't think anyone would say that it "Just Works" yet.
The only desktop/laptop OS that actually does "Just Work" is ChromeOS; and while that's a wonderful experience for its use cases, there are still plenty of situations that it's not great for.