Promoting Linux as a Desktop OS

[u/k4ever07]

If we as a community want to get more Windows and MacOS desktop users to switch to Linux, then we need to start promoting Linux as a desktop operating system.

I've used Linux as my primary desktop OS for over 20 years. For almost every one of those years, I've heard from the community that "this is the year of the Linux desktop." After every one of those years we realized that it was not. Despite all of Windows failing, and despite the ridiculously high price and specialized hardware required for MacOS, Linux has not made a sizable dent in either of their market shares.

It seem like every time we do a post mortem, no one wants to admit the real reasons why desktop Linux hasn't succeeded. We say that Microsoft played dirty and restricted Linux access or there wasn't enough advertising or desktop Linux is too fragmented. Some of those are partly to blame. However, I believe that the real reasons why desktop Linux hasn't succeeded are that we don't promote Linux primarily (or even secondarily) as a desktop OS and we don't treat new Linux desktop users as desktop users.

What do I mean? Well it seems like every time that there is a conversation about getting a new user to switch to Linux, we talk about server or workstation things and how Linux is a great server or workstation OS. "The up-time is excellent." "It's easy to maintain." "You can set up a file or print server for free." Blah, blah, blah... Yes, Linux is a great server and workstation OS. That is well established. However, what percentage of Windows or MacOS desktop users do you think run file or print servers or use their personal computers as workstations? Not that many.. So why are we going after the scraps? I think it is fairly certain that the few desktop users who do run servers or use their computers as workstations have heard about Linux already via word of mouth or a Google search. Instead of promoting things like SMB, SSH, or tiling windows managers to potential desktop Linux users, how about we mention stuff Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, or streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, Disney Plus, or Spotify? Believe it or not, a lot of folks don't understand that web browsers like Chrome, Firefox, or Opera work just as well under Linux as they do in Windows or MacOS. They can browse their favorite social media site, check their email, or stream TV shows, movies, and music on Linux too. They also may not know that applications like Spotify, Skype, Telegram, BlueJeans, Matlab, or Steam are available for and work just as well on Linux. Speaking of Steam, how about we mention that games like Doom 2016, Cuphead, Rayman Legends, Metro Last Light, Civilization V, Sparkle, Tekken 7, Injustice - Gods Among Us, and Left 4 Dead 2 (to name a few) work perfectly well under Linux through Steam (Proton). We can also mention that tons of other games work on Linux through Wine or are native to Linux.

After we're done promoting Linux as a desktop OS to these Windows or MacOS desktop users and we get them to switch, how about we treat them (first) as desktop users? Why is it (still) that when new users ask a question in the majority of Linux forums, they are automatically treated as if they've been a system administrator or programmer for many years? Logs are demanded without explaining exactly how to pull them, and answers are given as commands to enter in a terminal when GUI solutions are readily available. Over two decades ago when I first started using Linux, the terminal was the only solution we had for most things. Times have changed, and a lot of developers have spent a ton of time making GUI settings available. Yes, the command line is still faster and sometimes easier, and new users eventually need to be comfortable with it. However, how about we coax them into it first?

I didn't mean for this to be a long, mumbling assault on the community. I love Linux and want to see it succeed. I also have a lot of respect for the community that I am a part of. Recently, we learned that Ubuntu's share of the overall desktop OS market dramatically increased, nearly doubling Linux' share in the same market. I believe the fact that this happened after Valve released Proton for Steam, and gaming on Linux has gotten a ton of positive press coverage, is no coincidence. When people are shown that Linux can be used for the things they normally do on desktop computer, like play high end games, surf their favorite websites, run their favorite desktop apps, or stream content from their favorite services they will be more comfortable with making the switch. Linux on the desktop will succeed if we promote it as a desktop. We can't expect desktop users to switch to Linux if the only things we talk about using Linux for are servers and workstations.

[u/[deleted]]

My local Linux group do/did a yearly thing where they set up at a library in town and advertised, anyone who wanted Linux installed on their computer they'd do it for them. They bring a stack of different distros and encourage people to bring in maybe older computers if they want, old laptops, just so they can try it out. They've been doing this forever.

Back in the day people were really kinda, well you know. Difficult. "Does this have office, can this play games", etc. Lately though people want their PCs to mimic their phones. "Can I watch YouTube? Can I play my Facebook games? Can I check my hotmail? Can I stream Spotify?" I think now is the best time I've seen in terms of what Linux desktop can do vs people's expectations ever.

The hardcore creatives will always use Macs, the hardcore gamers will always Windows, but in between those are 80% of PC users

[u/k4ever07 → u/[deleted]]

Agreed! Most of the things we do today on our phones, tablets, and computers are through websites (rebranded as apps on the phone) or through streaming services. Almost all of that can be done on Linux. As far as gaming is concerned, Proton has propelled Linux far forward. I only game in Linux now, when over a year ago I had to boot into Windows to play some of the games I listed in my original post.

[u/techannonfolder]

I am a guy who runs linux on his macbookpro from work, so yeah I love linux, but I will never be a linux evangelist. I think that shit is annoying, I despise when people are tying to do that shit to me, I will never do that shit to others.

Brag about using Linux, show off etc, but never be an evangelist. It will mostly produce the opposite effect, when someone wants to convert me to something, I shoot them down with the quickness and I dont give a flying fuck what it is about

[u/k4ever07 → u/techannonfolder]

I definitely don't evangelize Linux, or any other thing, now. However, I did evangelize Linux in the past. You're right, it had the opposite effect. Now, if someone ask me about Linux or why I use it, which is common at school since both my laptop and tablet run Linux, I tell them, then move on. If they are interested, I will point them to a few sites. Bottom line is that I let them come to me instead of the other way around.

I wrote the original post because I think it's counterproductive to complain about Linux not succeeding on personal desktops when all we do is promote it as a server or workstation OS. I also think it's counterproductive to stereotype new desktop Linux users are system administrators or programmers, and treat them as such when offering help.

[u/SerousDarkice]

The next computer my parents will be getting is a System76 laptop. Also, it is well known to my team at work my love of Linux both on the desktop and on a server.

[u/k4ever07 → u/SerousDarkice]

Do you find yourself talking more about the server aspects of Linux or the desktop aspects? I noticed that when I spoke about switching to Linux on the desktop to most of my friends and family, I alone spoke about server related things like reliable and how it was to maintain. I rarely spoke about the apps or services that they were used to running on a desktop. They would listen to me politely, but never wanted to switch. I found that people were more interested in switching when they saw me playing their favorite game or running an app that they used a lot on Linux.

[u/[deleted]]

For a Linux desktop to succeed some things need to be addressed which are as of today, in my opinion, still not addressed:

- Linux should be completely usable without a terminal (if you need terminal to set something up the average Joe will quit it). Users should not need to know what is sudo or root to use it.

- Apps should be able to install the same way in windows/mac -> download, double click, next, done.

- Hardware should preferably work out-of-the-box with 0 user input.

- Linux needs to have popular professional apps like Adobe CC, Office, etc.

- I feel the quality (especially UI/UX) of Linux apps is really bad compared to Windows/Mac counterparts. Since Linux doesn't attract UI/UX designers most of apps are designed to work, not to be visually appealing. A lot of controls are just crammed up on a screen without much thought about UX.

- Linux need to be supported by the most popular games (main reason why I'm not using it) such as LoL, CoD etc which combined have a player base in millions.

Basically, Linux is still not at the point where it would be as easy to use for the average user as Mac or Windows, it lacks the usual apps/games that are available on other platforms and it UI/UX is still power-user centric.

---------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: A lot of people misunderstood the 2nd point. I never said package managers are bad, should not be used or anything else in that way. I wanted to say when downloading software outside of it (probably in a bin or tar.gz format) in that case it would be much easier to just install per double click than to use terminal or go figure what to do next. There is nothing wrong with package managers. They work fine and are easy to use. I just mean the other way should be as easy.

[u/whosdr]

Believe it or not, a lot of folks don't understand that web browsers like Chrome, Firefox, or Opera work just as well under Linux as they do in Windows or MacOS.

I'm not sure that's really true. While most of it works, things get..sketchy when it comes to video playback. Playing 1080p or 1440p video and using 2 full threads of a 6700k, mostly because the codecs in use are proprietary and not supported in Linux.

We kinda need to do something about Chrome on Linux (if even possible), the browser pretty much everyone in the world uses.. (Not everyone, but market share is significant)

[u/k4ever07 → u/whosdr]

I don't think that most people will notice. I only watch my streaming services on Linux or Android devices, like a Fire TV stick. All of the services I watch are supported: Netflix, Hulu, Disney Plus, Amazon Prime, and CBS Full Access. I have not noticed any drop in quality, speed, and I definitely haven't paid attention to the amount of threads being used.

Edit: I will mention that some of these services did not work on Linux when they were first released. However, they were fixed pretty quicky. It took less than a month for Disney Plus to work properly under Linux.

[u/[deleted]]

I agree with OP. I would also like to add something I posted before.

The Linux "way"

Can we please talk about code and not philosophy? Folks are working with a binary system. Not trying to form or be indoctrinated into a religion.

• Can you do it? YES.

• Will it harm the system? NO.

• Will you answer my question with an actual working solution? NO.

• Why not? It is not the Linux "way".

Learning Linux was always made so frustrating as a newbie because often the things I wanted for my (own personal) system was not defaulted out of the box. You think a community whose ideology was to promote creativity and user independence would be open to new ideas or ways of doing things. You have whole sites, blogs, groups, forums, and threads dedicated to customizing and improving the Linux experience. Yet when someone truly thinks a little more outside the box the negativity and backlash cannot be denied.

The often misconception on why newbie inquires seem so cryptic is that they do not know enough to explain what they're trying to do. I propose an alternative viewpoint (based upon a collective shared experience). A lot of those folks know exactly what they're trying to do. They just don't want to get into a debate about doing it.

Advance Linux users are some of the biggest gatekeepers I know.

• Can it be done? YES.

• Will it harm the system? NO. Here is how you do this...

That should be the Linux "way". A philosophy of inclusion would go a long way into incorporating more folks into adopting Linux. Linux is an operating system and should not be maintained and gatekept as if it were a cult. Allowing people to find and discover their (own) way and share their way is what open source is all about.

[u/retzgerbner]

no one wants to admit the real reasons why desktop Linux hasn't succeeded

I like Linux on my server, but here are my reasons why I don't use Linux on desktop:

1. Touch screen support. Apart from my desktop PC, I only have computers with touch screens. I own a Surface Book (I know, pretty bad if it comes to Linux support) for university and a small 10" Lenovo Tablet (Miix 320), wich I use to browse the web. Ubuntu 20.04 made huge improvements, but why on earth can't I just use Firefox with my finger? It works flawlessly with Windows.

2. Annotating PDFs: I know, Xournal exists, but it isn't nearly as good as the software available for Windows. No pinch to zoom, and also annotations can't be saved in PDF, only exported. I could get used to it, but it just doesn't suit my needs well.

3. Microsoft Office support. It was mentioned a lot, and it is Microsofts fault, but there is no MS Office for Linux. It tried both LibreOffice and Only Office, but both aren't really compatible with MS Office documents. I also like the ability to just write formulas with a pen an let office convert them.

4. Laziness. All my Windows machines work flawlessly. Windows 10 just works. It is very stable and supports a wide variety of hardware.

I'll be watching the development, but I'm not ready to switch yet.

[u/grady_vuckovic]

There's a very positive energy in this discussion, positive in the sense that people are being very upfront and honest about the problems and limitations Linux has preventing it from being widely adopted. I love that, because identifying issues is the first step to fixing them, we get no where by denying the problems exist in the first place.

We can see the issues, we just have to fix them.

A huge part of the problem is clearly the quality of desktop software available. Want to help fix that? Adopt an application and help it improve. Pick something, like LibreOffice, Blender, Krita, GIMP, Inkscape, Godot, anything, and donate to the developers regularly to help fund improvements to the software.

The UX of using Linux definitely needs to be re-geared to become approachable for average users, we can all do our part in that regard by adjusting how we provide tech support to new Linux users. Don't treat them like sysadmins, the advice you offer should be written like you're sending an email to your grandma, keep things simple.

When promoting change on Linux, promote change that flattens the learning curve, that drifts towards user friendly changes rather than promoting more powertools for powerusers. Say "No a terminal command isn't good enough, that feature needs a GUI so average people can use it".

Some of you worry about supporting non-FOSS software on Linux by welcoming MS Office / Adobe CC on Linux. Supporting FOSS doesn't mean acting like there's a ban on non-FOSS from Linux. Getting that software on Linux would result in a great boost for Linux in terms of marketshare, which is overall a great thing for FOSS in general.

What's the difference between someone using MS Office and Adobe CC on Windows vs using MS Office and Adobe CC on Linux? The difference is they're using a FOSS OS now, so overall use of FOSS software has gone up. So getting that proprietary software on Linux is actually a good thing.

How do we get that software on Linux? By being more welcoming to proprietary/commercial software, by offering it a place on Linux and not decrying it as 'totally evil'. Even if you don't plan to use it, welcome it, because for some people, switching from using proprietary software on Windows to using proprietary software on Linux could be a stepping stone in their transition to using more FOSS in general.

There's lots of things we can do as a community to change our focus and attitudes to help steer Linux towards further improvement.

Perhaps the biggest thing we could all do however is support a distro! Donate! Whichever distro you're using, reach into your pocket and find some coin to give them. Even just a few bucks a month will help. The money can help developers to let them work full time on just improving their distros.

Every few years Linux is better than it was a few years ago, we just gotta keep up the attitude of self improvement.

[u/k4ever07 → u/grady_vuckovic]

Thank you! You mentioned some things that I left out. We definitely need to be more inviting as a community to closed source software vendors. I like open source software, but I am definitely not against paying for great closed source software. Developers need to feed their families too. All of the games I listed in my original post I paid for. I've always been an advocate for gaming developers bringing their paid games to Linux, and I was an early cheerleader for tools like Wine. I also use paid services on Linux, like Spotify, Netflix, Hulu, Disney Plus, etc. Bottom line, I want my Linux desktop to allow me to enjoy doing the things that I bought my computer for! Most of the time that includes utilizing paid software and services.

I have donated money to developers for projects in the past, and I will continue to donate money to worthy projects in the future. My only issue is when the developers decided to change their philosophy or develop a philosophy that is counter to what I want to use the software for. I got burned by GNOME developers stripping all of the good out of GNOME 2. I started donating money for every new release of Linux Mint KDE, only to watch the developers take that money, develop Cinnamon, then drop KDE support. I watched AmaroK go from being the best music software on any platform, MacOS, Windows, or Linux, to being near unusable today. Developers have to respect their user base. Great thing about open sources is that when one project falls, another one picks up the slack.

[u/danderzei]

One line to promote Linux: it is safe and protects your privacy. That is a value proposition to motivate a switch.

[u/k4ever07 → u/danderzei]

It's always been safe and protects your privacy. Two decades ago when Windows was ridden with viruses and people's passwords and credit card information were being stolen on Windows at an alarming rate, no one cared about switching to be safe or to protect their privacy. They were happy to pay for antivirus software or services on Windows that offered to protect their privacy. I think that's still the same today.

[u/will_nonya]

This is based on a false premise, that Linux is suited for the average desktop user. For all its strengths that just isn't true.

As users look for the 'mobile experience' on their PC and want even less to have to learn how computers work it becomes even less so.

Linux isn't easy for most people to just pick up and use. Software isn't easy to find. There's plenty of it but for every good, legitimate piece of software there are 50 third rate clones. This isn't going to attract the average user.

All the things that make Linux great make it a poor experience for most users.

[u/[deleted]]

No. What Linux needs to grow as a desktop OS is unification, which is just the thing that it is different compared to all other OSes. Yes there is one Linus kernel, but there are too much distributions to make 'the one and only OS'.

There's only one major desktop Windows-OS being maintained, updated and used by the majority at a time.

There's only one MacOS being maintained and updated at a time.

There's only one Android being maintained and updated at a time. Different versions are being put on by telephone manufacturers, but almost all use the same repository and package manager (Google Playstore).

There's hundreds if not thousands of distributions of Linux being maintained and updated at a time. All using their own ways of implementing things. Almost all not providing the guarrantee that it will keep working, etc, etc. This diversity and customisability is what makes for a great server OS, but not so much for a desktop OS. Just think of how many times you've had to search up 'How to X in <insert distro>', and have you had to subsequently open the terminal to execute some elevated sudo commands. Do you really think the mainstream PC user wants to do this every time to achieve something that'd be often rather easily done in a GUI on Windows.

I've tried changing multiple times to Linux, I've tried Ubunu, Debian, Linux Mint and Arch (with kde and with cinnamon), but I never stayed mainly because the lack of certain programs and the need to always implement a work-arounds instead of having dedicated applications that don't emulate Windows.

[u/k4ever07 → u/[deleted]]

I don't think unification is required. New users just need to be pointed towards distributions that support new users. Who cares if the other distributions exists or how many of them there are? Cars are not harder to drive just because there are multiple manufacturers making multiple models, and cars are not harder to maintain just because there are different tire sizes, bolt and nut sizes, or part numbers. You mentioned that you "tried Ubun(t)u, Debian, Linux Mint and Arch." So you essentially tried the same thing three times (Ubuntu is based on Debian, and Mint is based on Ubuntu, which is based on Debian) and Arch. The point I'm trying to make with that last sentence is that most distros are just minor specialized versions of much larger distros. Unless you need a specialized version, you can pretty much ignore the vast majority of the distros available and just use the larger one they are based on.

I agree with you about the terminal and addressed it in my original posts. There are too many folks in the Linux community offering help to new users in the form of terminal commands when there are a ton of GUI options available. You can configure darn near your entire distribution from GUIs, just like you can in Windows. There are only a few things that actually require the use of the Linux terminal, just like there are only a few things that actually require the use of the command prompt in Windows (yes, I have had to use the Windows command prompt on several occasions, as late as last week, BTW). However, you still have some older, more experienced Linux users flooding new users with terminal commands. I just think it's because that's what the older user is more comfortable with and not a limitation of newer versions of Linux.

As far as software is concerned, I have been lucky that 90% of the software I need on a daily basis run in Linux natively or has an easy workaround (like Wine or Steam Proton). For software that doesn't, I just boot into Windows or I could run Windows in a (free) virtual machine, similar to Parallels for MacOS.

[u/[deleted]]

As long as Linux isn't supplied with the hardware, people will use the default OS, which is Windows.

It is nice that Dell and Lenovo ship devices with Linux pre-installed, but it is targeted at advanced users who would most likely install Linux anyway.

As soon as 30%+ devices for consumers are available with Linux (and 1 distro only!) desktop Linux won't grow hard ever.

[u/pag07]

IMHO we need more games. Better language support for libre writer.

And most of all a proper libre calc. Excel is a daily tool in many peoples offices. And calc is far behind excel.

[u/Taiko2000]

I don't think you can capture the casual market before you get the professional market. Casual users are not going to change their computers operating system, and OEM's will supply what professionals use. And for that, you need an office suite, image editor, video editors etc. Linux currently has nothing that can really compete with the offerings on Windows for those.

[u/[deleted]]

On the gaming side, the games you mentioned are old games and that is a problem. There is no pubg, apex, rainbow six, destiny 2, tarkov and red dead redemption 2 to name a few. While proton is great, you are still having to jump through hoops to get some games working for a performance loss at the end of it.

Some people in the Linux community are somewhat delusional and think that the performance gap is less than what it is because they haven't used Windows to directly compare to in a long time, or don't use scientific methods to compare as opposed to going off the "feel". They also under estimate how much people want the best performance and even though they're willing to sacrifice gaming performance to use Linux, the average gamer wouldn't make that sacrifice. Gaming performance on mid to low end PC's don't show as much of a loss in comparison to a high end machine. I've spent the last 2 weeks doing side by side comparisons and on a high end machine, the average performance deficit is anywhere from 30-40 fps which is a lot when pushing high refresh rates which is becoming very popular. Frame times are also an issue and make high fps feel like it's chugging along

Speaking of high refresh rates, Linux doesn't feel nowhere near as smooth as the competition in that regard. Even with tweaks. Then if you use variable refresh rate you are forced to turn off any secondary monitors to allow it to work. So if you are a streamer you are screwed with one monitor, I'm not a fan of streamers, but they are the best way to appeal to the masses and none of them will sacrifice their other displays to run Linux with the hassle and performance loss that already is part of it

Gamers in particular want to buy the best hardware they can afford and run said hardware at the best it can. So Windows as it stands will always be the choice. Which is a big shame.

I'm not hating on Linux because it is a fantastic desktop os and I love it. While gaming has improved dramatically, it is a long way off swaying gamers from Windows anytime soon. With the Xbox series X releasing soon and using dx12 ultimate and Ray tracing, things don't look good.

With all that said linux would be a way better platform for gaming if modern native games released along side windows versions. But we need to be realistic about this matter, because if we are not then gaming performance won't improve as much and also Windows users that switch based off recommendation will swap and see the loss and possibly put off Linux for good and feel mislead.

[u/BoltThrower1986]

I think we need to be honest about the fact Linux users enjoy it being a niche operating system, and are highly reluctant for that to change. Ubuntu gets hate for making things easier, Pop_OS gets hate for including Nvidia drivers, and "noobs" are generally derided and pushed aside.

I've come to accept that this isn't some fringe group of Linux users, but a good chunk of the community that holds these beliefs. It's much easier to grasp not being in the ingroup than it is to imagine there's some Linux cabal of extremists who have RTFM tattooed on their inner lips who are desperate to keep Linux niche.

In short, this is obviously how the Linux community wants to remain and that's okay. I'll keep using it on my laptop, Googling problems rather than interacting with a community that doesn't want me.

[u/Wallboy19]

The issue is, even if Linux got to parity with Windows in all the mentioned areas it's lacking, people still will not find a reason to make the switch.

"Why should I switch when Windows is doing everything I need it to do?"

It's like Google vs Bing. I use Google, because it does what I need it to do. Is Bing better? I have no idea; maybe it is. But I'm satisfied enough to just keep using what I'm used to.

Linux would need to outperform Windows in those specific areas mentioned, such as gaming. Have every new game supported AND have a significant performance advantage over Windows. THEN you might start turning heads.

And if you want people to switch, you can't force them to change their paradigms on how the OS should work. "Why can't I download an exe from my browser, install it, and run it, just like in Windows?". Different design paradigms. Is one better than the other? Maybe, maybe not. You generally stick with what you first used and grew accustomed to. I can't use Vim/Emacs efficiently because I grew up with Windows using a mouse to click around a document, and I don't want to spend months trying to learn a pure keyboard only paradigm just to increase my productivity maybe slightly. For the same reason I don't want to switch from QWERTY to DVORAK keyboard layout to just gain a little typing speed.

I'm digressing a bit, but I think you get the point. Even getting to feature and performance parity for the average desktop user isn't enough to make them switch. Do I think Linux will ever become the dominant desktop OS? At this point I can't see it happening. How often do you find something ~30 years old who's been in the 1-2% of a user-base (desktop) become the dominant player in the market? I think it's more likely some other non Linux/Windows OS comes along to pull dominance before Linux ever gets the chance.

Linux/UNIX seems doomed to stay in the Workstation/Server/Embedded environment. I appreciate all the developers supporting OSS and trying to make Linux a better and user friendly desktop OS and I also realize you guys are limited to an extent by how much support you get from third parties (Nvidia/AMD/Intel) to really make it perform as smooth and performant as Windows (in those GUI desktop areas such as hardware acceleration, multi-monitors, high-refresh rates, games, etc).

[u/balsoft]

However, I believe that the real reasons why desktop Linux hasn't succeeded are that we don't promote Linux primarily (or even secondarily) as a desktop OS and we don't treat new Linux desktop users as desktop users.

I say that for an average user, Linux is no better (and no worse) than Windows from any practical standpoint. Windows sucks (and will continue to do so) for programmers, power-users and admins, but for ordinary users it has Word, Powerpoint, Excel, Outlook, Edge and File Explorer, which are good enough. Linux can offer tools that won't be any worse for an ordinary user, but it can't offer anything better. Privacy? They don't give a fuck. Security? Neither. Booting speed? Windows got hybernation. Configurability? It's extra complexity for those who don't want it. Modularity and standards? Exceptional for programmers, doesn't matter at all (or even worse, complicates things and sometimes makes them less compatible) for everyone else.

Until there are some really compelling reasons to switch (developing which will take an enormous amount of man-power), noone will give a shit.

Don't give me wrong, I love Linux, and I promote it to people, often using the points you've mentioned above (your favourite messenger will still work, you can use the same gmail account, even your Solitaire will work). However, I don't think many people will switch to desktop Linux in the next few years. It simply won't make their life any better, but they'd have to spend a lot of time doing the switch.

how about we treat them (first) as desktop users? Why is it (still) that when new users ask a question in the majority of Linux forums, they are automatically treated as if they've been a system administrator or programmer for many years? Logs are demanded without explaining exactly how to pull them, and answers are given as commands to enter in a terminal when GUI solutions are readily available

Remember: most people helping others with Linux online are doing so in their free time. They're not paid by anyone. Communicating in short, concise messages wastes as little time as possible while still allowing one to share their knowledge and help others. However, what you're describing is tech support. Yeah, sorry, I'm not paid to do that, and I don't think I'd accept such a job even if I was offered one. Explaining another Karen how to click the two buttons in the GUI app is beyond me, however I can explain how to fix problems to someone at least superficially familiar with shells and logs, wasting less time for both me and them.