This is my whole point of 'defining Linux support' where the chronic inconsistency and mess that the Linux Desktop has created with competing system components conflict with each other and certain apps and this cannot be fixed.
Hence why you can't support all the Linux users, 100% of the time. Not even Discord can either. Since you get the complaining Linux user on an exotic distro with strange system-specific requests like supporting Wayland, XDG, Flakpak, GNOME, PipeWire, etc or not moving to Xorg which the devs have to hunt for the bugs all over the OS stack, but could end up only affecting that one user.
This is where developers draw the line and slap UNSUPPORTED on whatever exotic Linux distro you are using and 'letters' or 'requests' like this get ignored.
Due to that, this blog post explains why companies like Discord prioritise requests on predictable and consistent OSes, like Windows and Mac.
No where in my sentence did I mention the Steam Deck. My point spans beyond the Steam Deck and on to 'Linux Desktop' support in general.
Assuming you have read the article, it has already told us that Discord does not care to support the Linux Desktop more than Windows or Mac and would rather keep it outdated and working on most distros than to update everything and it ends up breaking on your favourite distro.
No company would seriously cater their resources to fully supporting an infinite about of distros to satisfy a small minority of non-paying users. Anyone expecting this is frankly trolling and know they cannot define Linux support themselves and writing such letters of 'free support' like this one is also futile.
I see nowhere in the article where it says fixing these issues (which largely just amounts to updating the version of electron they use) would cause it to break most distros.
Please point me to where it says that, as far as I can tell you're just making up your entire comment.
You see, I already said to you that 'defining Linux support' is unfixable. That is my whole point and it is spans beyond this topic where this 'chronic inconsistency' can only be found in the Linux desktop ecosystem.
> I see nowhere in the article where it says fixing these issues (which largely just amounts to updating the version of electron they use) would cause it to break most distros.
If it doesn't affect their favourite distro, then they won't care to write such letters or reports and that won't be their problem. It is Discord's or largely any software maker's problem to define this Linux support (which everyone knows they cannot.)
And no just 'updating the version of electron they use' isn't just as straightforward as the author affected by this issue would want to believe; especially with the tons of Linux distros some users out there and its ecosystem of alternatives.
> Please point me to where it says that, as far as I can tell you're just making up your entire comment.
Creating a strawman to attempt to refute my whole evergreen point about the Linux Desktop's issue (which is beyond this article) isn't a good way to convince me otherwise, unless Discord is a simple hello world app. If that was the case, this letter would not need to be written.
Unfortunately, Discord is quite more than that and its seems they are very hesitant to offer updates that can break the app on Linux.
Sure, but in this case specifically, "supporting (all) linux users" is already "solved" (they really only have to update their dependencies).
Also, nobody expects them to support "all" users. They are only supposed to update their dependency electron (which does the linux compatibility stuff already) and maybe maintain the distribution for one of their new gamer target groups (steam os).
> Sure, but in this case specifically, "supporting (all) linux users" is already "solved" (they really only have to update their dependencies).
And how do you know that it will 'just work' after upgrading their dependencies? My point spans more generally that is unfixable due to the level of fragmentation that is in the Linux Desktop ecosystem.
The fact that Discord hasn't done it tells us that they are both aren't confident in supporting an unstable desktop environment with too many moving parts or there is a low amount of users there which doesn't justify the urgency to fix these issues and will let it sit on a working version of Electron before they upgrade it and it breaks something.
> Also, nobody expects them to support "all" users.
Hence why, Discord knows that they will always get a plethora of annoyed 'Linux' users on an infinite amount of distro combinations reporting that the app doesn't work on someone's favourite distro.
Hardly the case for Windows and macOS users meeting the minimum requirements to run Discord where there is a guarantee of having 100% support all the time.
Hence why you can't support all the Linux users, 100% of the time. Not even Discord can either. Since you get the complaining Linux user on an exotic distro with strange system-specific requests like supporting Wayland, XDG, Flakpak, GNOME, PipeWire, etc or not moving to Xorg which the devs have to hunt for the bugs all over the OS stack, but could end up only affecting that one user.
This is where developers draw the line and slap UNSUPPORTED on whatever exotic Linux distro you are using and 'letters' or 'requests' like this get ignored.
Due to that, this blog post explains why companies like Discord prioritise requests on predictable and consistent OSes, like Windows and Mac.