141–150 of 181 posts
So many options of ways to lay out windows but fewer than half the actual applications creative professionals need to do their job, so we're still stuck on Mac or Windows.
I used to love the choice after being limited by Windows but it meant all the development and design efforts were split between different desktop environments so mixing apps from different desktop systems was an awkward user experience. I preferred KDE the most but I never understood the obsession with the number of customisation options. These surely slowed down development and it felt like you had to be the UX desi…
Try Ubuntu MATE, if you want minimal customization you have some preconfigured defaults in MATE Tweak tool, if you ever want to customize more its super easy compared to every other DE I've tried.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For every person loving those plain texts, there are one that want to see them purged from existence. Observe how Gnome has basically recreated the registry, complete with hidden magic switches...
Gnome re-created the registry because they needed features that plain text files don't have. I simply have a hook for my dotfile repo which calls "dconf dump / > .dconf". This dumps the entire tree and it's nicely versioned in the repo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Gnome stack is horrible. I long ago started questioning the sanity of the devs when they tried to build an entire office suite in C. Start any Gnome/GTK app and it will continously spew assertion failed log messages at you. Gnome has also forced certain standards, e.g. Network Manager when superior alternatives exist (the excellent Connman).
I'm stuck in GNOME -- any advice on breaking free is appreciated!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However, on the desktop, many different application want to read and write keys. Tray applets, the system config panel, even your media player... If your applications directly read and store configuration keys belonging to other applications, you have way worse problems in your architecture than configuration file format.
Configuration items like current theme or current default font are things, that all applications are interested in. If they want to have look and feel like the rest of the desktop, that is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Curious what features a plain-text file doesn't have that a registry would?
Most importantly, a stable API which can be concurrently used by multiple processes. Getting/setting single values in a plain text config file is cumbersome and error-prone, and even if there's a library which is able to read that particular format, it often clobbers comments and formatting. For systems administration, you usually solve this by generating the entire config file from a template since nothing on the se…
What? The INI format is very simple and there are numerous libraries that handle it cleanly in any language.
> and even if there's a library which is able to read that particular format, it often clobbers comments and formatting.
What? These are primarily machine-readable configuration files. Why is formatting relevant? And how are comments relevant to dconf, since it uses a binary format anyway?
If a plain-text file isn't good enough, at least have the decency to use SQLite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Curious what features a plain-text file doesn't have that a registry would?
Most importantly, a stable API which can be concurrently used by multiple processes. Getting/setting single values in a plain text config file is cumbersome and error-prone, and even if there's a library which is able to read that particular format, it often clobbers comments and formatting. For systems administration, you usually solve this by generating the entire config file from a template since nothing on the se…
Lock files.
I think the core of the argument about linux is not about having a well designed system that works well, but that it should be an american technology that dominates, and not anything that is managed by a non american, especially if he is against corporatism and tend to do things in a way that can be perceived as arrogant. So basically, linux will not prosper as long as it is not in the interest of the US.
Linus is naturalized though: https://lwn.net/Articles/404729/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure why you think you "have to tinker". I run Ubuntu 14.04 and use i3 window manager. I haven't "tinkered" with the setup in about a year-and-a-half, dating back to when I installed i3 shortly after I got the my last computer. The default Unity DE is nice, too. I don't use it, but I could have used it all this time, can't imagine what "tinkering" would be required.
I'll bite: I have to tinker all the time because hw compatibility still sucks. Wifi, sound, video-cards often require tinkering to get them working, especially after upgrading. They are a lot better than they used to be, but they still have a ways to go.
Ubuntu has turned into this franken-beast that is simply not cutting it for me anymore. Right from the installer (that doesn't work well on XPS 13 with name) to Unity to Mir. Fedora 24 has been brilliant and works awesome out of the box. I am constantly recommending F24 to people and have never had a bad experience.
Ubuntu are playing a (very long) game. If they manage it, IMHO they'll be in a better place than Fedora's UI which is built on a stack that increasingly only Redhat will continue to develop.
Are you aware that Redhat actually employs most of the kernel devs ?
Ubuntu does not have the "people's stack" ... It's just another company building a stack that is not as good.