121–130 of 172 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So now Microsoft gets the hate for reviving the UNIX way of working. How do you think companies were using X Windows?
> How do you think companies were using X Windows? By attaching thin clients to a server that was still under their own control, as opposed to making the whole company a serf to Microsoft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once Windows stopped having shit-tier stability, some time around late XP or early Win7, Desktop Linux replaced it as the least-stable and buggiest of the three GUI desktop operating systems I regularly use. Even before that, it nearly matched it in instability, if you counted X-Window crashes as the same as a bluescreen or kernel panic (and if you're doing GUI work, they're close to equivalent) The kernel might be O…
And yet Windows was successful even when unstable. I would say that's not a hugely motivating factor for people. Many people turn on and off their computer when they want to use it and it's fine. Excessive stability isn't a major factor for most people and being perfectly stable wouldn't by itself make this the year of the Linux Desktop. For this crowd it is important, of course, and I'd be deeply upset if my desktop…
Everybody had a friend who knew how to fix Windows.
And it was a literally a job, there were fliers glued to lamp posts advertising "I install/fix/devirus Windows for a small fee".
Also, during this time of unstable Windows, Linux was even worse. It wasn't the nice Linux desktop of today.
Much of the Linux desktop is balkanized and fragmentation is indeed a huge issue. People's obsession with choice is irritating given that doing more or less the same thing in 10 different ways half-right is worse than doing it once correctly. The entire distro-zoo built on top of the same distributions with different DE's on top of it is an example. The problem with Windows or Mac isn't that it looks, feels and works…
> The problem with Windows or Mac isn't that it looks, feels and works the same everywhere. Did you use Win 10 ? One GUI in Teams, another in Office 365, a calculator which comes from outher space, 2 interfaces for configuration, disable microfon for admin account -> no microfone for user account.
People don't care that TikTok looks different than Instagram looks different than Gmail looks different than NYTimes.com looks different than a flight reservation site.
As a desktop, Linux is now fully functional for most users. I know administrations running on Linux, law firms, and even my dad. Beginner users don't care about choices, they get Linux Mint or similar with LibreOffice and Firefox and they are good to go for most of their tasks. For advanced users, the abundance is a key benefit of this ecosystem. No company is fully focused on the desktop OS, and I don't see why they…
Unlike Linux. A few wrong clicks and there goes the GUI.
The main problem of Linux on desktop is a severe lack of quality control and questionable usability pushed by people not using desktop and running mainly CLI. The issues addressed on desktops are not in correct priority, you should not polish "happy path" in the generalized public system. Corporation can easily work with "happy path"-only software because they can afford to train personnel, and they can afford to fix…
I remember when I upgraded Ubuntu 14 to Ubuntu 16 and the GUI stopped working and was dumped to the command line. Luckily I had a Linux guru around to fix it, because otherwise my only alternative would have been to reinstall it - seeing how many esoteric steps he did to debug and fix it there is no way I could have googled my way out of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but the fragmentation is the problem. One reason Windows and macOS are popular is that people know what they are going to get. If you've used one Windows 11 box, for example, you can get on another Windows 11 box and figure out how to use it. It will have the same user interface and window management as the other: the Start menu, the control panel, the desktop, etc. That's just not the case for Linux. There are…
The problem is there is no decent software that runs on linux; I'd switch from Mac to linux if I could run Ableton, Adobe_products.* or Affinity_products.* And no, I don't want to hear about the software XYZ that is almost just like any of the above, because they aren't even close. If I just wanted to browse the web, and work in a terminal, then linux is great.
How many distros would they need to support to make customers happy? At what point does it become a problem of diminishing returns?
Windows and macOS are pretty big. How many more customers would Adobe get by adding support for: Ubuntu, Fedora, SUSE, Mint, Arch, Manjaro, MX, Gentoo, Elementary, and so forth? At some point it just gets silly and devolves into Muppet names and other nonsense -- and each one has a smaller amount of users.
Plus, real professionals are willing to pay for software. Open source is frankly not relevant for professional image editing, video editing, music production, CAD, etc.
Much of the Linux desktop is balkanized and fragmentation is indeed a huge issue. People's obsession with choice is irritating given that doing more or less the same thing in 10 different ways half-right is worse than doing it once correctly. The entire distro-zoo built on top of the same distributions with different DE's on top of it is an example. The problem with Windows or Mac isn't that it looks, feels and works…
The fragmentation peeves me as well. The Linux community is like herding cats with fragile egos. One disagreement and a dev will go try and make their own thing, further diluting the Linux ecosystem. There are way too many distros that are half baked trash that make it into bad listicles returned in search results. The Linux community sabotages itself.
I do not see a problem as long as there are a few good ones to choose from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no reason there can’t be one agreed upon blessed way of doing things in Linux while still enabling users like you to have choice. Heavily enforced defaults are important for growth.
Yes, let's search for the One True Font, One True Theme, and Unicorns while we're at it. Oh, let's also pretend that we'll give users a choice. Well, technically, we will but we will make it "unsupported" and call it a hack. Wait, I think that reminds me of a desktop environment.
You can have as much snark as you want. I specifically said that Linux should remain the platform of choice, just that the defaults should be stronger so that it's a more consistent and approachable platform for people.
GNOME has made great advancements in this regard, which has been awesome to see.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> [I want] screen tearing to not happen on X11... If you have AMD hardware that uses the 'amdgpu' driver, then -IME- enabling the TearFree option seems to completely eliminate tearing. (Though, I am using KDE, which _also_ has a "Make the compositor use vsync" option... which didn't actually eliminate tearing, when used by itself. But, there _may_ be confounders.) Anyway. Drop this into a file named "$WHATEVER.conf"…
What a great example. This stuff should be fixed by default .