No, it’s better to be honest. The average user isn’t ready for Linux, because Linux is not ready for the average user. I’d never try and get someone to use it if they’re not already interested. I hate that it is this way, but it is. Linux is only really for people who already want to use it. Because if you’re not interested in using it, you’re not going to put forth the time investment to gain the benefits from it. No matter what angle I look at it from Linux is not for the average person.

Your second paragraph says it all. Find out if the user needs to dual boot? The answer is obviously “No” because no matter what they’re using the computer for, Linux is unneeded for them, since they have Windows. There are tangible benefits to using Windows, since it runs their software, meanwhile, you failed to list any real benefits to using Linux for the average user. It’s faster? No, not really, since they’ll be learning how to use it, and even ignoring that, it’s not so much faster that they’ll perceive it anyway. It’s more secure? Not really, Windows is the better choice for the average user in that respect, since it’ll automatically force them to restart the machine every week to install security updates. Main choice of professionals? That’s not entirely true, and even if it were, it’s not relevant, the average user is not a professional. And for anyone who already owns a computer already running Windows, Windows was ‘free’ too.

The only time to have this discussion is if the user is having a PC built, and then the answer is also “No” to Linux, because they’re going to buy Windows anyway, since it’s better for gaming, and that’s the primary reason for someone to build a PC, unless they’re doing a specialized task like video editing, and if they are invested enough into the task to want a PC just for that, they have specialized software that almost always runs only on Windows, and even if it were able to run on either, it’s not my place to alter their workflow.

The real elitist attitude is thinking people need to use Linux in the first place. For me and (maybe) you, it might get the job done, but for my family and friends. It’s better that they use what they’re comfortable with. The main point of a computer is to accomplish tasks, and giving them Linux is a hindrance to that.

Linux is great, but it’s not for everyone, and it may never be.

There’s 0 need for Linux to grow. It powers 80% of new web-apps, runs the big gaming systems, parts of azure and aws. It’s the go-to server os for most use-cases.

The Linux desktop needs to mature if it’s to grow. Non-tech users don’t care for “new and innovative ux paradigms”. They don’t wanna scan the internet to figure out why sound is missing after upgrading to pop_os 4. That or they need someone close by to fix it for free

Things are about to get worse for onboarding those from other platforms. There’s been this massive push the last year to get every window manager to switch to Wayland & drop X11 support… meanwhile Wayland doesn’t support color profiles or color management (just sRGB). How are you going to convince someone with an awesome screen to drop down to sRGB? How will you convince someone with a poor screen that has been color calibrated to make it usable to go back to off colors? How do you expect content creators to migrate & still create content if they can’t have access to all the color tools they use in their workflow to come to Linux when Wayland won’t support them? A lot of Linux folk act like this doesn’t matter, but to a lot of people, a computer is a magic box that they interact with via a screen + keyboard + mouse, & if non-niche peripherals aren’t supported (which DCI-P3 is becoming the norm & saving a screen from a landfill can often be fixed to ‘good enough’ thru calibration), users will think it’s trash & unfinished.

deleted by creator

My own opinion, won’t fit with post like this

Stop telling people it’s ‘tech-y’ or acting like you’re more advanced for using it, you are scaring away people

So lucky that OpenBSD never cared if anyone used the operating system or not

The operating system is for developers, to fit developers’ need

That’s it, spread Linux to as many people as possible. The larger the marketshare, the better support we ALL get

the better support for single root partition… UNIX have a removable filesystem, you can use different partition for / and /usr and /usr/local and /var and /home but hardly any distro can offer that. They all use a single root partition for everything just like windows use a single C:. Spliting /home is just like spliting D:

quality is better than quantity… look at the current state of linux communities (and distros too!) make me switched to BSD

10 person knows how to code python or DOS’ C (Turbo C, obsolete) might be better than 100 person that use linux like they would use windows (but think themselves smart)

And if everyone is going to use wine then you should use Windows instead. I think it is much more stable and secure to run windows apps natively

1. copy down your windows product key

can’t drop windows entirely? h-

it is not more secure for the average user. sure it can be hardened to a great degree but that takes proper knowledge of the underlying architecture. for the average user’s ootb experience, Linux is the least secure option.

I’ve been using Linux for 30 years now, certified to teach it and everything… Here’s your problem:

“Stop telling people it’s ‘tech-y’”

Compared to Windows or MacOS, yes, it is very techy.

“offer to help them install.” - If they need your help to install it they absolutely have no business running Linux.

“They don’t understand the concept of distros” - If they have no understanding of distros, they have no business running Linux.

Think of it like this… if they can’t wrap their head around a distro, what’s going to happen when you try explaining a package manager?

I get the evangelism, but Linux simply is not for everyone, that’s why Apple invented iPads.