Nope. That is an experience that will push them right back to OSX or Windows.
Causal users just use the system how it is, I sometimes find them suffering trough a complicated workflow because they did not consider to even ask themselves "maybe this can be improved, maybe there is a setting to do this or a shortcut or some better way"
Casual user hears about Linux, and that Ubuntu is the most popular Linux, then goes to the site
And reads: "Ubuntu 19.10 is here
The latest version of the world’s most widely used Linux platform for Kubernetes, multi-cloud and machine learning.
Download Ubuntu 19.10 now"
And the problems begin -- he will have to upgrade twice a year.
The branding would have to be different for that not to happen. The LTS should not be called LTS but simply Ubuntu. All the versions between two LTS versions should be called like Ubuntu Developer Preview 19.10, and they should be offered easily on the site.
Then one could claim that the casual user wouldn't use the "Developer Preview" versions.
As it is for years, it's not so. Just explaining what the exact difference between LTS and "newest Ubuntu" and why they are still offered the "newest Ubuntu" on the web page would at best confuse or annoy the "causal user."
The casual user will "the newest" but "the newest that works" and that he "doesn't have to change." Not in the sense that nothing is updated but that the updates aren't invasive to him. And the "newest Ubuntu" versions are invasive -- the last time I've tried such, not even a GUI partition manager worked.
The people you are talking about are enthusiasts, the probably re-installed Windows before too,
Your definition is useless: it would just mean that casual users simply never use Linux OS at all, and aren't supposed to use it, as these with your definition also wouldn't have an awareness to specifically buy a separate computer with preinstalled Linux.
To make a definition of a "Linux casual user" in any way meaningful, you have to assume that it's somebody who would like to try to use Linux, especially without a specific desire to pay for a new computer for that.
Oh, and also without the specific desire and readiness to use command line having the ingrained assumption that the GUI tools simply don't work, which is relatively common case in desktop Linux, even with LTE.
By the way, my quote also shows what Ubuntu consider their casual user, based on the strengths they advertise:
"The latest version of the world’s most widely used Linux platform for Kubernetes, multi-cloud and machine learning."
I'd say, from their point of view, the target user on that page is, interestingly, somebody who needs but is undecided which Linux platform to use for "Kubernetes, multi-cloud and machine learning."
Which is also interesting, but also doesn't follow that such a person would expect his installed OS to have broken applications every 6 months because of OS experimentation in compositors or whatever.
In my definition a casual user has his computer setup and managed by somebody else. Someone that helps the casual person to buy the laptop/PC that fits their budget and needs, that installs the browser and extensions for them, that installs the apps they need like Skype.Word installs the printer and other devices for them.
Someone that can installs Linux (usually you need to go in BIOS/UEFI to enable boot order and disable secure boot and other shit) is not a casual in my opinion.
Do you think that Ubuntu users are the casuals and Arch are the power users? I will disagree with that, I used Arch in the past but now I am happy with Kubuntu LTS just because a DE and OS is a launcher for my applications and not a identity.
About Ubuntu home page, I assume Canonical is not trying to target the casuals with that page, casuals can't just download and install Ubuntu on any random laptop or PC, there s also no money to be made.
The design of the ubuntu.com download buttons encourages people to download the LTS version while making the latest stable version easy to find as well.
But trying going to a conference that isn't organised by a company, or as a venue for companies to show their products. They exist. They are usually associated with open source groups/meetups of some kind. In some ways they are very vanilla - no fancy food or hotels, nobody actually pays for that crap out of their own pocket.
But the talks - the talks are from a different world. Nobody is there to talk about their company. It's engineers talking to other engineers. Some are serious, some are playful, some are seriously nuts, but all know they are talking to their peers and are not game to spout too much bullshit. If they don't believe it, it doesn't get said. It's like comparing the comments on HN to the journalistic output on a mass media site.
The author or company building the software requires money in exchange for using their software. The revenue acquired through the license is then use to pay for additional development.
Revenue sharing seems to imply some kindness / goodwill agreement.
Paying for a license won’t get you customers but paying for referrals will
Coming from a rails background, this was the closest out of the box testing experience. Tests are generally handled within a transaction and also offer fixtures and other goodies. Definitely recommend giving it a test drive.
Persistent Volume Claims go a long way toward the stateful service "feature".
To go another step further on stateful services, SF's stateful services are only supported in a couple languages. Where mounting a volume in K8s which will follow your container is pretty darn accessible to any language.
Nearly all the libraries working with AMQP 0.9 will not function when targeting an AMQP 1.0 service.
If you are thinking about a masters in CS, you must check out the OMSCS program. The cost to value ratio is completely off the charts!
"total program cost of about $6,600 over five terms"