The Secret to Switching to Linux Isn’t Skill—It’s the Right Distro

One of my main gripes with some YouTuber reviews of Linux, is that they center on how power users tend to set and use Linux distros. And that is something that pushes people from even trying Linux, because most people aren't power users, and just want their computer to let them do what they want.

Distros like Linux Mint, Zorin OS, and Ubuntu, can be used by people who know how to use a computer that aren't into power user skills sets. Even their installation is easy enough to follow, since they guide you to the process and set things up for the user via a graphical interface. Even most system administration, like installing/uninstalling app, themes, keyboard layouts, can be do though a graphical interface without touching the terminal.

This makes these distros good starting point for people who just want to get away from Windows, try Linux out, or start learning Linux.

Yes, no Linux distro works exactly like Windows or macOS do. Yet, the learning curve is far more gentle that those YouTubers make it to be. It has become quite gentle, the biggest hurdle is apps. Not all apps that can be used on Windows or macOS are available on Linux, but most are. As such, unless an user depends on an app that isn't on Linux, and there isn't one that can replace it, there is no reason that the jump can't work.

Not only that, power users of Windows and macOS don't use the OS like the average user does. As such, I can see how a power user of any OS can have a hard time moving to another OS, while the same thing can't be said for the average user.

As such, the issue is not if the average user can make the jump to Linux stick. The issue is paring the user with the distro that will make the jump stick more likely.

Stability Where It Counts, Modern Standards Where It Matters

With age, I've come to realize that become more selective where I want to be on the bleeding edge of tech and where I rather take a more conservative approach to the OS and apps I use for my daily life.

For example, I prefer to use Linux Mint on my laptops because of its focus on stability. While I see why some people prefer, or need, an OS with the latest and greatest, I prefer my OS to be stable and just add new things when they are mature. In apps like my web browser and office suite, I prefer to be a lot more up to date with modern standards.

All depends on what I need to use a certain piece of software for, and the same goes for hardware. Most of the the time I just need them to be stable for every day use, without any feature that gets on my way. I don't mind learning new ways to do things, if those news way will actually are a better way to do something. If not, there is no good reason to change anything.

Meanwhile, I don't mind software developers change the aesthetics of their app, or OS in the case of Linux Mint, until I actually use it. Most of the time, the change in aesthetics is not that much of a big deal, and I get used to the new way it looks rather quickly. Most of the time, I don´t notice it much.

When the workflow is changed, I reserve judgement until I actually have time to use it and see if it works for me. The reason I moved from Ubuntu to Linux Mint full time, was when Canonical dropped Unity and Cinnamon became the better fit for my needs. The reason I did not made the jump sooner, mainly was that Cinnamon wasn't mature enough for me when I first tried it.

At the end, I've become aware that one has to be selective where and when one can play conservatively. Sometimes, it is worth to be at the forefront of tech while others is better to wait for it to mature.

Why Small Businesses Deserve Better Apps (And How to Build Them)

As someone who has spent all my professional life on small or medium enterprises, I find the apps targeting this sector to be either too expensive, not user friendly, or both.

There is a market for app development, specially for small businesses, since there isn't enough competition and the apps that are targeting this sector seem to see this businesses not worth much to give them the app their need or just want to sell them what big companies use.

Some don't use the app's full potential, because certain features of the app don't apply to the business. Other times, is because developer of the app doesn't offer the option to develop features the business needs, either because the developer doesn't offer the option to do so or because is too expensive for the business to do so.

In other cases, the business stop using the apps they paid because a failed implementation or they found it to be too complicated to train their employees to use it. At times, is the business owner who just grows frustrated, and decides to drop it because it proved way to hard to get the results she/he wanted to see.

Also some small and medium businesses choose not to get an app because they can't find the right one for their needs. So, they use apps that aren't ideal for their needs. At times having the information they need to run they business on separate apps that can't be integrated, making the decision making process harder and losing time looking for results.

Not having the best app, and being able to integrate it to other apps or to the business model, makes harder for small and medium business to adapt and keep being competitive. As such, the app market for small and medium business is leaving money on the table because there isn't enough offerings.

After a Decade with Firefox, I Made the Jump to Zen

I've been using the Zen Browser for a about three months now, and it has done what no other web browser has been able to do for more than a couple of decades. It took the place of Firefox as my go to web browser, something that until a couple of months ago seemed unlikely.

To be honest, it helps that Zen is a fork of Firefox. It allows me to use my Mozilla account, which made the transition easier. Not only that, all the it feels a lot more modern and supports Firefox's add-ons. The only thing that it doesn't is Firefox's themes, but for me is not a big deal since Zen looks a lot better for me out of the box, and it just takes some tweaks to make it feel my own.

It also helps that it is a free and open source app, which I prefer over proprietary apps where is possible.

Honestly, I made the jump not because I didn't like how Firefox has changed with time. I just found that Zen comes closer to what I want my web browser to look and behave. And it helps that it not only a fork of Firefox, but its updates continue to have Firefox as a base.

Now, the browsers I can recommend are Firefox and Zen. Both are fully free and open source apps, with different take on how to implement a web browser, as such they target different people as an user base. Most importantly, along with other Firefox's based web browsers like LibreWolf and Waterfox, gives users alternatives for web browsers not based on Google's Chrome.

Personally, I see Firefox and Zen as the best options for mainstream users, or users that just want a web browser that with a focus more on their needs. Though I'd say that Zen is a bit more privacy focused that Firefox is nowadays.

Now, if only Linux Mint developers would allow to make web apps based on Zen it would be great... 

Cyberpunk Is a Warning, Not a Blueprint

As someone who likes Cyberpunk, and thinks that some of the tech shown on the media, it worries me that some people see Cyberpunk setting as something to strive for and not as the warning it is.

The unchecked implementation of tech, at times along side unchecked capitalism, creates societies where all the problems we currently face are made even worse creating a society that destroys itself or where the ones who control the resources basically enslave the rest of the population.

Cyberpunk is a warning about advancing tech without putting the needs of the people at large first. All tech development need a set rules that prevent a few to make use of it in a way that isn't in the best interest of the whole of society. Yes, tech needs to be developed, but in a way that benefits the most people possible.

We do need tech to make better worlds, and move forward in the best way possible. Yet, it should bring along the most people possible in a way that its implementation is a net positive. It should not be seen as zero sum game, but as something where most people can use to make their lives better as a society.

It is about making tech help bring the best for the individual, and the society at large. If we want individuals, and societies, to thrive to their full potential, both need the conditions to do so at the same time.

The warning is Cyberpunk is not tech, is how it was implemented, employed, or developed. Is the warning of how not to do tech.

Paper, Pens, and Practicality: Building the Ultimate Desk Setup for Administrative Work

As someone who works at the administrative side of business for more of a decade, I find it frustratingly hard to find desk setups targeted the kind of work I do. Most of the time, the desk setups are targeted to content creators, gamers, or programmers.

The admin side is more of a side note for programmers and content creators, most of the time just pointing out storage options for the paperwork they need to do. Other than that there are some peripherals that could be used by admin workers, like mice, keyboards, and monitors. The chair is one where there some commonality, and the desk on some degree.

The desk is the most annoying part, since they all seem too big or too small for what an admin worker does on daily basis. Content creators tend to need more things on the desk, like lights, microphones, cameras, and the like. While programmers tend just to need their computer, monitor, mouse, keyboard, and some note taking implements with some stationary,

Admins tend to use a computer with its peripherals, but need more space for stationary like staplers, pens, tape, and more space for paperwork that is being worked on at the time. Some might need a printer, specially if working from home which doesn't need to be on the desk, but would be nice to hace it on the desk.

As such, our desk space for often than not lies between the programmer and the content creator. While I see most admins making a good use of standing desk, with a nice chair, finding the correct size can be difficult. Storage on, and around, the desk is another difficult thing to find, since our storage needs, don't need as many cables, and tech, like content creators.

The same goes for every day carry bags, since we don't have to bring with us cameras, lenses, and other support tech. While some of use might bring a laptop, we also bring food containers and other small items like an umbrella, notebook or pad, some pens. But, we are most likely to sit down for actual work at our office or home office desk. If we do sit at a café for example, is more likely we will manage email, or have a meeting with clients. As such, a tablet, or notebook, will be more enough to take notes or show the work done to the client.

The closest I've seen to my needs have been some lawyers, some programmers working for big tech companies, and some startup people, but they generally lose me when it comes to the bag they use. Specially when it comes with bringing the food they cook to work, since most of the time they get food service at work, or don't mention that part of at all.

I've been thinking about staring a place where to show case how admin workers setup their desks, and they manage their everyday carry. I just need to know if anyone would be interested.

Stop Gatekeeping, Start Listening: A Better Way to Recommend Linux

As a Linux Mint user, and someone who advocates for Linux in general, I find that saying what distro should you recommend to new users, or the one users should have on their computers, is something that isn't useful in any way for a wider Linux adoption.

When helping new users choosing what Linux distro to begin with, we should actually listen to what they need from their OS. For some, Linux Mint will the best option, for others might be Zorin OS. Some might be better served by Pop!_OS, all comes down to what they need from their OS, and the computer they have.

Limiting new users to a single point of entry, is setting them up for failure to adopt Linux. Not every new user to Linux has the same same needs, skill level, computer, or expectations,  for what Linux should be or do for them. As such, there is no ideal or single distro that should be said to be for new Linux users.

As for the arguments for which distro is the best, or be the  Linux users should targets, is also one that should be more focused on the user instead of the distro itself. I've over a decade using Linux, and I've no intention to move to Arch or any other so called advanced distro. I plan stay on Linux Mint, with Pop!_OS being an option. The main reason is that both of these distros work for me without a problem, they just allow me to focus on my work without having to think about the OS.

This is why a prefer, and advocate for Linux. There is a distro that fits you, not perfectly but close enough. What Linux needs to be more widely adopted, apart for being installed out of the box on more computers, is people that actually listen to new users to guide them to the distro that best suits them.

After that, places where people can physically to get support when they need. Not only that, a place where they can talk to people about what they do on their computers, and get advice and tips to better use of their computer. Even learn about apps that can make their work easier.

While some people just need to read a wiki, go to a forum, or watch a YouTube video, to solve the doubts and problems they encounter, others are better served by meeting people in person to better understand and learn the same things. One the strengths of Linux are the communities that are built around it, distros, and other projects. We need to build them online and offline.

There more we focus on making Linux better for the people who actually use it, the better off Linux and its users will be in the long run.