Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Elderly relatives are the best candidate for switching to linux.

They need to do what? Browser, zoom, email client. They are never going to install anything.

All of these have great options on linux, and they work just as well.

Just put them on Debian stable and be done with it.



Yep. While my mom was working she needed too many Windows-only applications. But once she retired, I set her up with a Linux desktop and it's been smooth sailing.


I installed Debian (with Mate desktop) for 3 different elderly ladies.

All 3 give it a solid thumbs up. "It never crashes", "It's so easy", "It's fast", "None of that Windows bs".


I installed zorin on an old machine that was given to me because it wouldn’t run win 11. I like it a lot. Debian based, clean smooth UI. Just tell them Microsoft improved the user experience with windows 11.


X X Windows L.E. => (e)X X Windows (Wayland) L.E. (Linux Edition)

Even the one major 'windows' app that my mom needs to use is going Web only... so I figure if I install Debian Stable + Widevine that'll cover 99.9% of the use case and I gain an OS that just works correctly.


I installed them Mint and they said it's better than Windows due to all the built-in free apps (like public TV)


i think a good ubuntu is a bit better than just debian for this. probably linux mint or kubuntu. for just debian, then mint debian edition or mx linux would be best, imo


> imo

Any particular reasons?


i just fret about grandma using plain debian. my first thought is i want to give her puppy linux. it's probably fine if she lives in firefox though.


What do you believe Ubuntu has that Debian doesn't and will make their lives easier?


generally, it's more user-friendly and has more third-party stuff like codecs and drivers. i think it's also got more of a community to help with issues, whether googling or using the irc client that normally comes with a distro.


Chromebook.


A locked in Google platform while Google is helping Microsoft implement mass data collection...


Most of them can be turned into a vanilla linux laptop fairly easily, and even support custom coreboot firmware: https://docs.mrchromebox.tech/

That being said, it's also pretty easy to get a full linux shell and even install gui apps via flatpak or whatever.


So that all your chat history with the relative goes straight to train Google ads? No, thanks.


Chromebook is absolute garbage


Linux is under control of the same companies

Besides, all major distributions (Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu) ship with a shim signed by Microsoft, and systemd..

*BSD is the only escape, but for how long?


I feel your passion, but I feel this is a little hyperbolic? I feel your passion is directed more at UEFI secure-boot than at Linux. I am no lover of the UEFI secure-boot world, using shims as a first-stage boot loader component whose job is to bridge the firmware’s trusted key infrastructure (typically Microsoft’s signing key) to a Linux (or other non-Windows) bootloader/kernel chain.

> Linux is under control of the same companies

Linux is indeed open source, so are you trying to say that "Linux is EFFECTIVELY under control of the same companies VIA UEFI WITH SECURE BOOT ENABLED"? Or is there a big-Tech cabal controlling Linux in another manner? I get that most big-Tech companies are major contributors to open source projects.

> all major distributions (Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu) ship with a shim signed by Microsoft

Having a shim signed by Microsoft makes no difference if these distributions are being installed on hardware without UEFI firmware implemented on the motherboard’s SPI flash e.g. motherboards from Purism (Librem Laptops), System76 (Thelio, Galago Pro, etc.), Framework Laptop (2021 →), Star Labs, Raspberry Pi / Single-Board Computers and uncountable DIY PC builds with motherboards (ASUS, ASRock, Gigabyte, etc.) that expose Secure Boot options. It is usually only when consumer hardware is being used from major OEMs (Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.) that ship with only Microsoft’s key in the firmware trust database.

> and systemd

You are suggesting that “systemd” is also part of the lock-in or control (in your mind) of those distributions. But strictly in the context of shim and Secure Boot, systemd is not the same issue: systemd is an init-system/process manager in userland, not part of the firmware/boot loader signature infrastructure. Major distros use systemd, so from a “vendor/lock-in” narrative they may lump bootloader trust and systemd governance together. But strictly speaking your assertion is more of a opinion/ideological piece than a formal technical dependency.

> *BSD is the only escape

Not true. Not all Linux distributions use it — Tails, Qubes OS, PureOS, Alpine, Void, Gentoo, etc., deliberately avoid it. Most minimalistic, privacy, or DIY distributions refuse the Microsoft-signed shim route because their users are expected to control their firmware settings or use owner-controlled keys.


You're technically correct, but you're slicing the argument so thin it disappears

The YouTube drama you glossed over is the point: we've reached a stage where explaining how to bypass Microsoft's arbitrary hardware requirements gets censored for "physical harm"

On systemd: calling it a Red Hat/Microsoft, driven monoculture that mediates everything from device mounts to DNS is accurate, the same consolidation that gave us Microsoft signed boot chains also delivered one init system to rule them all, dismissing this as "merely ideological" is exactly how normalization works, by the time it's a technical dependency, it's alreadt too late, look at the "cloud" ecosystem..

You listed exceptions, but let's be honest, they are only just distros.. Tails and Qubes are security, hardened research tools, not daily drivers for "elderly relatives". Alpine, Gentoo and Void require deep knowledge, technical skills and an ongoing maintenance that defeats the "set it and forget it" goal

And yes, you can buy a Purism or System76 laptop, but that's the exception that proves the rule: you must pay a premium and choose their hardware to escape the shim problem, that's not freedom; it's choosing your corporate master from a smaller menu, all subject to the same master/ideology

*BSD remains the only ecosystem offering a complete, usable desktop without either a Microsoft signature or a sprawling, vendor, controlled init system, if that sounds hyperbolic, it's because the Overton window has already shifted so far toward corporate control that stating the obvious appears radical

Today Linux supports most HW but Tomorrow, if the Chip Security Act passes, chips will be legally required to contain tracking and kill-switch mechanisms, while the Act doesn't directly mandate Linux to restrict hardware support, it creates the legal infrastructure for exactly that: either mainstream distributions cooperate with the surveillance architecture or risk being barred from running on modern hardware

The 'choice' becomes BigTech-approved Linux that supports backdoored silicon, or niche distros that can't run on any new machine

I could continue with many more examples, but I feel like none of the people over hear understand the point

https://www.centerforcybersecuritypolicy.org/insights-and-re...


> Void require ... ongoing maintenance

Strongly disagree on this one. All operating systems require maintenance of some sort, but you singled out Void and I find I'm doing far less maintenance with this one. Even with the venerable Debian, it always required some sort of regular maintenance to work around the bugs of it's legacy packages; Void does not have this glaring issue.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: