Ask HN: What did Linux not do right?

I remember praising mac os memory management back in the days when you could just go to "Applications" folder and open everything at once without a hiccup.

Today, even rebooting with "reopen apps" option is a nightmare.

Manjaro's head is cluless, and that's putting it nicely. More than once their SSL cert expired, and rather than fix it, just told everyone to set their system clock back.

He effectively stole a bunch of code and s/myname/manjaro the entire codebase. To the point I had to add serverside code blocking their users hitting my server.

They did not have(and may still not have) anyone who knew anything about the linux codebase, but still decided to hold packages in the name of 'security.' So zero days took much longer to fix. And introduced bugs still got introduced, just later. It's not like RedHat or Ubuntu who have real professionals checking things... it's just a hold.

Endeavor guys were super nice. They contacted us asking to work together, telling us their goals, etc. By that point we were mostly moved onto other things so couldn't offer much help. Endeavor's system is much smarter and safer. It puts you on Arch repos, and doesn't hold packages. That's ideally what an Arch installer should do, no matter what the neckbeards on arch forums squeal about.

A more competitive operating system would be based on Gentoo. After all one of the most, if not, the most popular os for laptops is Chrome, or was at some time at it was based on Gentoo if I read that correctly. Correct me if I'm wrong.

To make it more friendly to users of Debian (and all it's children) I think it would be great apt commands ran transparently to compile, optimize, and install and remove software without breaking things.

Because of the time involved system vendors like Dell can make a repo for each system they offer if from top to bottom the build process is coordinated.

In between hardware and basic os design, a fully fledged desktop is desireable for new machines and I think KDE's desktop is sane enough to work well even if it does consume more memory. But everything is perfectly optimized. A new system could boot in just 7 seconds or less. There would be no snap, or weird repos you have to trust with your life with.

AppImages for apps would be fine if the system would always know where they are and how to update them.

I know basically nothing about gentoo and how to install and use it. I just know it is a major pain in the ass. But the thing is, this is the only way to make a professional operating system for the general public. Google proved this with Chrome OS.

Making everyone become a master at using portage and understanding what all these options is not needed if the blanks are filled out in advance and doing something like:

sudo apt install thunderbird sudo apt uninstall snap

Being able to do that, boot quickly, stable systems tailored by the manufacturer, its really full stack control. The Ubuntu Stack is looking really nasty recently. I hate having to rely on it.

Making a good operating system should be as easy as going to a vending machine, pressing buttons on a screen, and out pops a usb stick which is brain dead simple to install without destroying everything in your system. Perhaps a packet comes out from the machine that explains how to avoid data loss.

The vending machine would be like menus at a store. You select what kind of cpu you use and you can be as nerdy about it as you like your make and model of computer. It could be like something you would find at MicroCenter. A little kiosk that Dell would make to cook up a custom system and put it on a fast disk that some one at the store can help the elderly preinstall it.

The musicians store kiosk spits out usb drives that are preloaded with vetted software. Paid for software can be selected and the music store gets a cut of the royalty. Whatever goes on that disk just works. Can we just do?

The Game store sells USB drives that contain only one game. It has just what it needs to play a game on the system type you select.

Staging development could help improve software quality. It is always frustrating on ubuntu trying to find the latest and greatest. Wouldn't it be nice if that software was also byte code optimized? Maybe its only 10% better. But we have limited electricity and every little bit savings helps.

Quality is ensured so if your system isn't listed then too bad for you. However you could try your hand at compiling your own from a middleware distro that had a similar kiosk interface but more options and warnings of what may or may not happen with your selections. What the kiosk pops out is always 100%.

A kind of royalty system can circulate the kiosk service for different stores. System makers can get involved on the demands of stores that wish to serve up desktop systems.

There is always a demand for newer better software and if the integration is always simple, people are willing to pay for usb sticks.

Linux as an ideology is like all ideologies, they are flawed. We just want software that doesn't disrespect us. We want a clear relationship with our venders. We do not wish to be warped into a mind stealing model of business. People would use kiosk software not because the software is all organic free range GNU software. They use it because they trust it and it does what they want it to do.

I have 5 Linux machines and systemd made my life little better on all of them due to using the same commands and not having to pay attention to distro differences. I periodically backup logs and configs, I scan for errors and post them in private channels, I'm able to monitor if a service fell on its face, I have a small naive resource meter, and a few others.

I'm not an advanced sysadmin by any meaning of the word, but I know enough to make my life easier. Maybe you're using your machines in a very different manner that make systemd crap the bed? I'm merely saying that it doesn't do that for me.