A better question might be why shouldn’t they? I’m not being pedantic (at least not intentionally) but if their defining characteristic is that they’re nothing special, just a simple Linux distro that does the basic shit easily enough and looks nice - that has major appeal to people unfamiliar with Linux looking to leave other OS’s behind. The vast majority of people that use an OS really have very little idea how it works or why. They just want some basic level of understanding and control over it.
Ubuntu community is bigger than Zorin. More resources, tutorials, etc.
Zorin adds only the following value:
More themes, primarily lookalikes, which is arguably a bad thing.
When people see Windows, they expect Windows. Installers, package managers, peripherals like printers, etc. are different from Windows. Pretending to be Windows makes people feel at ease for a moment at the expense of fundamentally misunderstanding what operating system their computer runs on, and it’ll trip them up eventually, probably sooner rather than later.
See macOS: It looks and feels different. People don’t mistake macOS for Windows. People who use Windows don’t expect macOS to behave like Windows, and vice-versa. But hey, let’s make macOS look and feel like Windows at first glance. Why can’t I run that .exe? What do you mean, I must use an app store? What is HDCP, and why does it prevent me from connecting this laptop to the projector?
For iOS that’d be questions like: Where is the Play Store? Why can’t I install that (Android-only) app? I think you get my point.
This is one of the reasons why branding exists. Yet many Linux distros would like to believe they can replicate the Windows experience through a miracle, and fool themselves into thinking that’s a good thing for Linux newcomers. It’s especially bad for people who don’t know they use Linux, like when they use computers at the office, library, etc. with a distro like Zorin.
A better question might be why shouldn’t they? I’m not being pedantic (at least not intentionally) but if their defining characteristic is that they’re nothing special, just a simple Linux distro that does the basic shit easily enough and looks nice - that has major appeal to people unfamiliar with Linux looking to leave other OS’s behind. The vast majority of people that use an OS really have very little idea how it works or why. They just want some basic level of understanding and control over it.
Let’s use Ubuntu for comparison.
Zorin adds only the following value:
When people see Windows, they expect Windows. Installers, package managers, peripherals like printers, etc. are different from Windows. Pretending to be Windows makes people feel at ease for a moment at the expense of fundamentally misunderstanding what operating system their computer runs on, and it’ll trip them up eventually, probably sooner rather than later.
See macOS: It looks and feels different. People don’t mistake macOS for Windows. People who use Windows don’t expect macOS to behave like Windows, and vice-versa. But hey, let’s make macOS look and feel like Windows at first glance. Why can’t I run that .exe? What do you mean, I must use an app store? What is HDCP, and why does it prevent me from connecting this laptop to the projector?
For iOS that’d be questions like: Where is the Play Store? Why can’t I install that (Android-only) app? I think you get my point.
This is one of the reasons why branding exists. Yet many Linux distros would like to believe they can replicate the Windows experience through a miracle, and fool themselves into thinking that’s a good thing for Linux newcomers. It’s especially bad for people who don’t know they use Linux, like when they use computers at the office, library, etc. with a distro like Zorin.