Live data from Hacker News

Burn My Windows

github.com

261–270 of 282 posts

Re: Burn My Windows

#261
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My god I wish companies would stop iterating on desktop “default” design. The only features on a Mac I use are Cmd+space and Cmd+tab. Beyond that it’s just a host. Every time they add crap I have to find and disable it all. By all means make cool stuff but also make it opt in.

So much this. Things I need my OS to do are: run my apps (office/browser/games), connect my devices (printers/game controllers/displays), basic file operations (copy/paste/delete) And while doing this be: secure, reliable, out of my way. All these adding people/chat/weather widgets "innovations" (looking at you, msft) make me throw my hand up in the air and ask "why", I wish they would spend that time and energy on s…

Ahh that weather widget was so bad. I had to use Windows for one project, and one day that abomination just appeared there. It rendered very badly (text didn't look at all like other taskbar elements), it was in a wrong language (???) and unnecessarily hard to remove. Felt super unprofessional, something I'd expect from browser malware.

Re: Burn My Windows

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. When someone relates their negative experience with an OS you happen to use, that is not a personal attack What personal attacks are these? All I’ve seen thus far are adults having a mature conversation. > or invitation to expound upon your own contradictory experience That’s literally the point of social platforms. You cannot post an opinion on a public forum and then declare that other people are forbidden to…

> this started out a positive thread talking about Linux composing managers and there wasn’t any need for anyone to start arguing about how much better Windows was but that happened. That isn't what happened, this is my point about taking things personally. Let's look at what was actually said: > Compiz was great at drawing curious people in but I'd argue that Compiz helped many people write off Linux. After which th…

I think you are missing the most important point laumars made that is somewhat relevant:

> I’ve done a considerable amount of research on this topic over the last 20 years and for the at least 10 years of it the actual main reason Windows users don’t like Linux is simply because it’s not like Windows. It doesn’t matter how much better Linux might be or how crappy Windows might get, if people are comfortable in one thing then they generally don’t like switching to another thing that behaves differently. And Linux behaves very differently.

Now, I am curious if that research is public anywhere? That's been my gut feel for the last 20 years too, but I've never had any data to prove it either way (provided the methodology for that research stands to scrutiny).

Now back to the point, I agree that Compiz contributed to both attracting and pushing people away from Linux. It exacerbated any stability issues in the graphics drivers, but at the same time, there was a huge presence of all the Compiz-stuff around. I similarly already used Linux (since '98) for stability and hackability on the desktop, and I had no interest in Compiz because of the fragility.

Still, it's obvious from the discussion here that there were people who were both pulled in and pushed out due to Compiz situation. As nebula says themselves, it hasn't really pushed them out, but instead it's the continuing troubles they experience with every yearly attempt to switch to Linux (and sure, their choice of hardware may contribute to it: I've had better experience with Thinkpads than even with Dell XPS 13 preloaded with Ubuntu). Basically, just like you get a very specific model if you want to run Hackintosh, you should look for computer models with decent support to run GNU/Linux on (it's just that there are many more models to choose from that would run great OOB): and don't trust the certification, because that doesn't cover all the things a consumer might care about.

Re: Burn My Windows

#263
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I install a clean copy of Ubuntu on to my PC, start using it and then stop when I discover some serious bug What do you do when you encounter a serious bug in your OS of choice?

>What do you do when you encounter a serious bug in your OS of choice? When I say serious bug I typically mean serious OS breaking bugs. Some examples from these past years(these all happened different years): 1) After clean install, desktop crashes after first reboot and I am thrown into terminal. Result: Stop usage and move on. 2) After Clean install, I wish to copy some files to an fat32 USB drive(Sandisk purchase…

I completely believe you've experienced these. TL;DR: Linux, like all other systems, mostly has issues with hardware. For a proper experience, get a system that's known good under Linux (and you need to use a non-ideological distribution like Ubuntu which will ship proprietary drivers). Linux-focused or business models of major manufacturers are your best bet.

1) sounds like a hardware issue or hardware compatibility issue. Unfortunately, while Linux does come with great and extensive hardware support out-of-the-box, you'd still benefit from choosing hardware that works well with Linux. Thinkpad T series (I usually use X1 Carbon, but as the highest end ultraportable it can introduce some Windows-specific firmware issues that they only resolve in a few months after release — they did that with Gen6 when they switched to new always-on-standby, but they introduced a BIOS option for Linux ~6 months later) is usually the best bet out of big manufacturers, and Linux-focused ones like System76 are a good choice too. So if you want to try out Linux next time, get Linux hardware that will work well with it first (or be ready to debug issues like the ones you mention).

These sort of issues happen even more on Windows if you clean install it on a wide variety of hardware (MacOS can't even be installed on your non-Apple system, I am guessing, so I'd say that it's even worse :). The benefit Windows has is that it comes pre-installed on those systems.

I've seen 2) frequently ~5 years ago myself: you had to really ensure that you unmounted FAT32 devices cleanly and waited for the system to announce that the drive was safe to remove: don't do that a few times, and filesystem will be messed up enough for Linux FAT32 driver to be able to cope (Microsoft, having developed FAT32 themselves, has an obvious advantage there). They don't seem to cause as much corruption anymore (only the file you were transferring might be corrupted), or maybe I learned to wait properly. Also, flash drives can degrade and cause all sorts of issues where it seems to work properly in other systems but causes silent corruption. If this was an old flash drive, that's the most likely issue: I've learned to go with only SanDisk Extreme flash drives because they have the best write endurance, but they are multiple times more expensive for the same capacity compared to other flash drives (including SanDisk ultra stuff).

3) is really weird, and external display connectivity has been a huge issue ~10 years ago, but I haven't seen any issues since (including in presentations on random projectors, multiple screen types and such): the only stuff that still annoys me is the default of setting up new screens as extended, chromeless display areas (I'd definitely default to "mirror screens"), but once a screen is set up, it saves the settings forever. Still, this is most obviously a driver issue (integrated Intel graphics is usually most stable, Nvidia most performant, but AMD should be becoming the best of both worlds in the last few years, though it's hard to get their GPUs).

And since you say these don't happen with Windows, just 10 days ago I had to reboot my X1 Carbon into Windows (that it came preinstalled with) to file some tax paperwork and I connected it to my Dell 4K TB3 display (which I dock to and undock from repeatedly on Linux without issue: all of this is pretty high end Windows equipment). On reboot, TB3 light remained on and it stopped charging and passing DisplayPort through (still worked as a USB hub, and rebooting back into Windows did not fix it). I was thinking I'd have to go to the service shop since my laptop is still under warranty, but as I was pulling my SSD out to prepare for that, I realised I could just disconnect the battery and see if that helps, and luckily, it did.

In short, dealing with hardware is hard (which all your issues seem to be), and all of the operating systems have different quirks. As above, I had a pretty terrible issue with an expensive Windows laptop and Windows-supporting screen ($3000 + $1200) which worked without issue under Linux for more than a year. Apple has a huge advantage because they control the hardware they ship with, Windows is generally worse on arbitrary hardware but has the benefit of being pre-installed and "pre-debugged", and Linux is better than Windows but has to be clean installed (I am pretty confident that if you took random 20 laptops off the market today and attempted to clean install both Windows and Linux on them, you'd get a fully working Linux system more easily; MacOS easily loses out on such a benchmark).

Re: Burn My Windows

#264

Compiz was probably the single most impactful event for desktop linux of the mid 2000's. Not that it itself made much of a difference, but the ripples affect many areas we take for granted today. A few reasons: - it put linux ahead of windows and mac in terms of appearance; - it brought many new users and most were a good mix technical and enthusiasts; - it showed the advantages of modular software; - many plugins we…

The physicality that Compiz and wobbly windows brought to the desktop was a huge boon to my productivity. Everything was low latency, high framerate, and just felt real . I could rotate my virtual desktops around and they felt like actual spatial locations for organization. I could drag windows and they felt like quasi-tangible objects, not just abstract rigid platonic rectangles. It was far more than just a gimmick,…

You can still use compiz today if you use a modular desktop like MATE or XFCE.

Re: Burn My Windows

#265
post #17
post #4

Love the flashback to the old Compiz days! The only thing missing now is wobbly windows.

I miss the fad of Compiz effects. Sure they were silly but it added a little fun to the desktop. I never really got into desktop themes preferring something plainer and smaller (because screen real-estate was still a commodity back then) but wobbly windows and closing effects largely didn't take much away from usability while still adding a little personality.

You can still use compiz today with MATE or XFCE

Re: Burn My Windows

#266

Compiz was probably the single most impactful event for desktop linux of the mid 2000's. Not that it itself made much of a difference, but the ripples affect many areas we take for granted today. A few reasons: - it put linux ahead of windows and mac in terms of appearance; - it brought many new users and most were a good mix technical and enthusiasts; - it showed the advantages of modular software; - many plugins we…

Even thought most was useless I still wait for to see native zooming coming back. For visionally impaired with high resolutions this is more relevant than ever.

Re: Burn My Windows

#267
post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss that feeling. Desktop moves at a much slower pace today.

Me too. Desktop "progress" is now sadly now mostly done by Microsoft (geriatric at best) and Apple (mostly just implementing the new graphical design whims every year).

That's not right. Gnome Shell overthrow the whole concept of a desktop in the past years, KDE never stopped to invent and there are hundreds of small WMs for every liking with hugely different concepts.

Microsoft and Apple both are stuck comparingly both running the same Windows 95 approach for all their desktops since.

Re: Burn My Windows

#269

Compiz was probably the single most impactful event for desktop linux of the mid 2000's. Not that it itself made much of a difference, but the ripples affect many areas we take for granted today. A few reasons: - it put linux ahead of windows and mac in terms of appearance; - it brought many new users and most were a good mix technical and enthusiasts; - it showed the advantages of modular software; - many plugins we…

Yes, Compiz, yet another point where Linux could have grabbed massive mindshare in the desktop market, when there was massive ... what do I say ... confusion? incompetence? exhibited by Windows especially. And... it went nowhere. A shot at a truly amazing desktop that would put it even above OSX. Squandered. The desktop market is STILL, ten years after windows 8, STILL ripe for the taking.

Linux is still far superior when it comes to window managers.

If you like the Windows 95 approach both Microsoft and Apple are using you have KDE/Plasma, mature, stable and full of helpful gimmicks.

If you like the out of your way approach and still have all the luxury of a modern desktop (a bit like windows 8 wanted to be) there is Gnome Shell.

If you don't want to waste resources just try something like openbox and if you hate desktops all together try something tiled like awesomeWM

If desktops would be any argument for the average users nobody would be using windows today.

Re: Burn My Windows

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to say the same. It makes the computer "feel" better. It reminds me of discussions around Mac vs PC in the early days. The experience of using a Mac was more "fluid" than Windows. The Mac would draw windows faster, move the mouse faster (as in more refreshes of the cursor position per second) and that made it more comfortable to use. At the same time I also used Sun and SGI boxes regularly and the stark differ…

If you use KDE wobbly windows are built in to its KWin compositor. :) I forget the exact details of how to get to it since I don't use KDE anymore (long-ish story), but even most of the silly things Compiz did are a configuration checkbox away in KDE.

Yeah, but it just doesn't quite manage to Compiz/Beryl feel. It is difficult to put a finger on but whoever did Compiz wobbly windows had an eye for it that the KDE devs don't.

Using both, I can't imagine getting excited by KDE wobbly windows in the same way that Compiz could get a "wow!" by demoing wobbly windows -> desktop cube.

It was a short, beautiful peak of Linux on the Desktop where a high was reached and then desktops just fell away from it.

Post reply on HN