[k0tan32]

I often notice that Linux (and maybe some BSDs) can accommodate two extremes on the tech competence spectrum especially well: the least opinionated users may treat their computer as a black box and just enjoy web browsing / chatting / media with some help, while the most savvy can extract value from tailored and private setups (like stability of Debian or power of Nix).

At the same time, Linux on the desktop fails often for everyone in between: the learning curve is still higher (especially for people coming from Windows), and some very specialized professional proprietary software can be missing.

Luckily, as mentioned in the article, Microsoft tries to make the balance more equal.

Writing this as a person who has used Linux for the last 15 years with a 2-year break for macOS and back.

[JohnFen]

> the learning curve is still higher (especially for people coming from Windows)

I don't think the learning curve is higher at all. It's roughly the same as with Windows. But if you're coming from Windows, the fact that you have to mount a learning curve for the new OS can be a real friction point. When most people learned Windows, they did so over time, without pressure. If you're switching operating systems, you likely want to become competent in it very quickly. That can make it seem like the learning curve is higher when, in fact, it's just that you're trying to run up that hill faster.

[k0tan32]

I agree with you per se that the learning curve in many ways is a function from your past experience, but there's no contradiction with what I previously stated in the context of this article - since émigré from Windows will obviously have some experience with Windows, they have this learning bias already, and potentially a different mindset/expectations (the most famous - why can't I just download an .exe?!)

Some [1] Linux distros were even trying to emulate this experience (which is a dead end obviously)

[1] Like Linux XP https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=linuxxp