71–80 of 402 posts
What I get out of this is that while each of these issues may be individually dismissed, they together make for a very "non-premium" experience. I use linux myself, but when people I know try it out, they immediately leave after encountering problems with audio, dpi scaling, etc
(!) With "Linux" I mean GNU/Linux distros.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing you're relatively tech savvy and enjoy troubleshooting (within reason). Most people aren't, of course.
Not the person you're replying to, but I fall in the same boat as them as far as Linux experience goes. And for me, I find I have way more trouble doing things on Windows/Mac than Linux. I think it's really more a way of thinking about how a "desktop OS" is supposed to work. People coming from Windows expect things to work the same, and that's just not the case. Likewise, when I unluckily find myself on some closed-s…
I like that analogy (even though I am still looking for that pure democracy/open source government). In Linux you have the freedom to do allmost anything with the system, but you have to know what you are doing, as the system usually does not stop you, when you are about to do anything stupid. Windows makes me mad, when it tries to manage me. Like "Yes I really want to use this computer without firewall or antivirus, because it is not connected to the internet and never will be because it serves another purpurse." To do this you need to mess with obscure registry settings, the default behavior of windows is enforcing it and nowdays also updates, because most users don't know or care what they are doing and are used to be told what to do.
So I believe it is good that I can do anything with my system, but everybody started as a newb once so a more beginnerfriendly version could be helpful.
But Linux main problem is hardware support, and fixing broken audio/graphic/wifi driver is something which can drive away very experienced people. (it drove me to ChromeOS for my laptop)
I've been running KDE Neon on NUC for a while, and Kubuntu before that since KDE 3.5 days. But still it's not ready to become my primary desktop. The main issue for me is RDP-like (not VNC-like) remote desktop experience. Without that I'm not even gonna try. I mean the kind where I check my desktop before I leave for work, resume the session remotely from work (when compiling or whatever), and pick up when I get home…
I get that some people don't like linux, but some of these examples are just ridiculous. Linux is administered by ssh therefore administrators don't know how to check so therefore they don't bother to update systems because "they're afraid that something will break." C'mon.
Linux as the open-sourced work of brilliant software developers wouldn't power most servers if it sucked. But could designing good desktops need more than just good code? Good kernels successfully run code. Good desktops successfully help users. I guess different goals require different designs? Edit: to clarify, I didn't mean desktops don't require well designed software. Just had in mind that a desktop also have to…
Linux is powering servers and high performance computing because it is good at these things: mostly static hardware configuration, set up once during system installation high performance, modularity and the ability to inspect a deeply running system of you are an expert. It ticks all the boxes for these specidic environments.
On the desktop, not so much. For example, the concept of device files is hindering use cases that should "just work". When I plug in USB headphones, a new audio device is created. Fine. But I need to enter the device file name or ALSA device string onto half a dozen programs to use it. All I would want is to have the audio rerouted automatically. Pulseaudio was touted as the solution to that problem, but ar what cost? We're now literally stacking audio systems on top of audio systems and sacrifice to arcane gods to have it work.
When I plug in a USB drive, I now have to look up its device file name in order to mount it manually. The software stack required to automount it from a desktop environment is atrociously complex, because it requires root privileges to mount a device not listed in /etc/fstab with a user flag. And because any number of drives can be connected in any possible order, no entries in fstab can be made.
This clash of UNIX-like concepts and modern user expectations is what is holding Linux back. The underpinnings are not bad. They were just designed for a different task.
So, yes, you can build a user friendly OS. Yes, it can have a clean design. But it won't be called Linux anymore.
The only thing about Linux I never really like is the package system. Like if you want to install a new software, you usually don’t get .exe or .dmg. If you are lucky, the developer or some fans took the time to package it. Then you can do ‘apt-get’ ‘yum’ or ‘pacman’. However, packages got stalled and sometimes don’t match the original author intent. You can also build from sources, but it takes time and you have to…
You clearly have never used Linux in any form. There are multiple package managers, granted. However, one strength they all share is: "you usually don't get .exe or .dmg"! Absolutely! Apps are integrated and not simply add-ons as they are in Windows or Apple land. When I want to install say libreoffice or wireshark I simply ask the system to install them. I absolutely do not browse the internet and download something…
I think a lot of this is learned, or conditioned behavior ... there are a great many UNIX packages that could very easily (and very nicely and conveniently) exist as static linked, single file executables.
This is how a lot of software distribution worked in the 90s - for say, some Solaris tool or whatever. Granted, the distribution mechanism (some .edu FTP site somewhere) was totally insecure, but the packaging mechanism was great.
_For instance Microsoft and Apple regularly update ntoskrnl.exe and mach_kernel respectively for security fixes, but it's unheard of that these updates ever compromised the boot process._ I had updates rendering my computer unbootable by messing up the MBR at least twice.
Exactly. You cant walk away from Windows 10 without the chance of coming back to a bricked system because it auto-updated and broke.
So far the only thing that really bugs me is that I have to apply fixes in the terminal. Like installing a printer only to find the scanner function was installed but wasn't configured - and the only way to get it to work is read a few forums until you can figure out which of the myriad installed utilities will actually return the info you need to configure the driver, etc. It's often a few, because the first half dozen results are wrong!
Strangely enough, I don't find anything in Linux to rival Notepad++, WinSCP, or AutoHotKey - just the type of thing I was expecting to find new and improved. Those programs just have a better UI, and great functionality, to get things done without going full command line commando or buying into a the resource bloat of full ide. Right now I am using both sublimetext and visual studio code, because they both have things the other lacks. I could just use np++ for everything before. Doubling my ram made that less painful than it would have been otherwise. Obviously a very personal itch, but one I suspect a number of people who are on the cusp of accepting a Linux desktop might have.
But I trust Linux's stability since I have had zero issues in decades of administering my servers, and don't worry about updates the way I do on a less informative OS. Specifically, once you are used to apt, the list of packages that will be installed tells you a lot about what might break or not on your system. And there will always be a way to revert to older libs if necessary, which might not be true on a locked OS.
The article is not entirely accurate, and can be hit or miss. Granted, I'm cherry picking, but I'm cherry picking the pieces which I have direct knowledge which are definitely misleading. > ! X.org architecture is inherently insecure - even if you run a desktop GUI application under a different user in your desktop session, e.g. using sudo and xhost, then that "foreign" application can grab any input events and also…
>A linux user would say, "So that's not a bug, that's the power of the root user. Don't do that or lock down your root access."
It's actually recognized as a huge problem and one of the driving forces behind Wayland.
What I get out of this is that while each of these issues may be individually dismissed, they together make for a very "non-premium" experience. I use linux myself, but when people I know try it out, they immediately leave after encountering problems with audio, dpi scaling, etc
I have found its super dependent on what hardware you get, Especially on laptops. I always pick hardware that works perfectly with linux and I am left with a very premium experience but when using linux on bad hardware like macbooks and broadcom wifi everything just doesn't work right.
I have a Dell XPS15, specifically chosen because the XPS line is supposed to work well with Linux. Numerous problems, all related to drivers. But the main problem is that every time Windows updates it wipes out GRUB.
I figured that my problem is that every laptop I've bought has been designed for a non-Linux OS. So I've ordered a Purism laptop, which should arrive any day now. Hopefully actually buying a laptop designed and built to run Linux will provide a better experience.