And how does Linux get software? I was discussing that two comments ago, we've now come full circle.
Nefyedardu
They would for the same reason they use Linux on their Chromebooks, Android phones, Pixel watches, Steam Decks or TrueNAS server. It's pre-installed. Why do you think that argument is an "excuse" is my question.
If anybody is so clueless about Linux that they need to take a quiz like this, they should probably just use something easy like Mint or Ubuntu.
Flatpak doesn't run the latest stuff typically. Like I'm on Mesa 23.1.4 on Flatpak and 23.1.6 on Fedora. Probably newer than what Ubuntu has though.
What would it take for Linux to run all the hardware and software it needs? Companies need to make develop for Linux. In order for that to happen, Linux needs market share to make it profitable for them. But in order for Linux to gain market share, it needs to run all the hardware and software it needs. So in other words in order to get market share, Linux needs market share. How does it do that without being preinstalled on devices?
It all depends on your hardware. If you run standard hardware with an AMD card, all the drivers you need should (theoretically) be in the kernel and will magically just work. As soon as you start using running hardware with proprietary drivers then you have to put in a little effort. Might require you to install separate package(s) from a third-party repo or something, and that will require terminal. It's just three commands usually: add the repo -> update your package manager -> install the driver. Not hard but if you are used to the Windows way of doing things it can be intimidating.
Even still, some stuff just doesn't have Linux support at all or it's completely community-maintained. If every company just open sourced their drivers and did things the "Linux" way then there would be no issue but unfortunately Linux doesn't have the market share for those companies to care. So you get into the negative feedback loop of: Linux has low market share because of lack of support, and companies don't support Linux because of low market share.
Linus' brand of assholery extends to cussing out some of his colleagues via email when they did something stupid, sometimes. It's not even remotely comparable to Steve Jobs (horrible treatment of his daughter) and Bill Gates (EEE strategy, monopolistic practices).
Ask enterprise companies and hospitals how secure and reasonable Linux seems for their business models.
...this is a joke right?
“Mobile.” Yeah this one is a joke.
You seem like you have zero idea what you are talking about...
That's not what Tim Sweeney was saying, he was saying they didn't need to improve EGS to woo customers because developers would leave Steam for Epic to get the smaller cut anyway. No gaming platform thinks catering publishers and developers should actually outweigh the needs of their customers, or if they did they certainly would never say it out loud lol.
That's why I protest by walking into people's homes when they are at work and shitting in their kitchen sinks. Then I leave a pamphlet explaining climate change next to it. They think about climate change while they clean it and change their voting patterns the next day I imagine.
Pro-publisher and pro-developer do not equal pro-consumer. In fact, Epic has never minced words that consumers are not their primary goal. "Developers will decide the game store wars, not consumers", remember? Tim Sweeney aaid that to justify not improving his store. I don't know about you, but in my view if Epic does not value my experience as a customer then I simply won't value them as a company. Is that not fair?
It isn't about supporting Linux, it's about supporting the hardware that comes with it on it. The Steam Deck demonstrates plainly that good hardware with Linux on it will receive dev attention. Game developers now talk and brag about "Steam Deck support" (which is actually just Linux support) for every major game release. It's not an "excuse", pre-installed Linux does work.
I have a hard time believing MacOS is even close to 20%. Hell on Steam Linux users outnumber Mac and the gaming demographic is lower on Linux to begin with. And lack of Mac software support is pretty obviously a result of them (fairly) recently dropping the x86 architecture, so companies have to remake a lot of software for them and it's not easy.
I don't see you proposing any solutions to this problem. So your opinion is Linux just doomed forever? Microsoft owns this market and that's it, competition isn't possible and the world has to use their closed source operating system for the rest of time?