Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What killed the Linux desktop

tirania.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 385 posts

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#151

Post by lttlrck »

wheels wrote: post #109
cletus wrote: post #97

This is the money quote: > The second dimension to the problem is that no two Linux distributions agreed on which core components the system should use. Linux on the desktop suffered from a lack of coherent, strategic vision, consistency and philosophy . Every engineer I know likes to do things a particular way. They also have a distorted view on the level of customization that people want and need. I like OSX. Out o…

> I have two monitors on my Linux desktop. A month ago full screen on video stopped working. [...] In this regard, both Windows and OSX just work. Just because it's never happened to you on OS X or Windows doesn't mean it doesn't happen. OS X 10.6.7 broke the output on my 13" Macbook for either of the two external displays I own. Both worked fine previously, when booted from the install CDs, or from Linux on the same…

I had a similar 100% CPU issue with an ExpressCard on a MBP... it was even labelled Mac Compatible.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#152

Post by Derbasti »

tsahyt wrote: post #103
untog wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even windows, crappy as it may be, has it. [...] Apple's work looks pretty-- because it is designed to function well. Actually, I'd say the same of Windows, if not more so. I far prefer the Windows 7 interface to OSX, it's just stuff like the terminal/command prompt that really lets Windows down.

I heard Windows PowerShell was decent. No first hand experience though

But it is not Unix.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#153

Post by lallysingh »

nirvana wrote: post #25

I think he's right, but I think he's missing a key point. Design. Design is what killed the linux desktop. It never had it. OS X has it. Even windows, crappy as it may be, has it. Before I go on, let me say that Design is NOT "making it look pretty". In fact, thinking that this is what design is, is what leads many linux advocates to reject the needs of design. Apple's work looks pretty-- because it is designed to fu…

Linux never got usable enough for design to matter.

The process of getting linux to boot, and then run usably -- with wireless networking and sound -- was too hard. If you got as far as being able to actually get work done, you claimed victory and used your machine as a continuing monument to your success.

In 2001, when I switched from Linux to OS X, the mere fact that I could go buy a machine, turn it on, open a terminal, and type 'ls' was enough to make me switch. It still took hours to get a portable machine working reliably with linux -- and it took 2 machines if you wanted wifi to work at the time. One to get wifi working, and another to look up the documentation and download whatever you needed.

Even as I'm back on Linux, I don't think of buying anything other than a ThinkPad, for the fear of returning to that worthlessly hellish place.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#154

Post by lttlrck »

farinasa wrote: post #131
sjs wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's silly to pretend that Mac is somehow perfect in these matters. Straw man. Nobody said OS X was perfect. > In my experience it's only been marginally better than Linux, if at all. I used Linux on my desktop for several years and have now used Macs as well for several years. I won't say this is bullshit because I don't think you are lying about your experience, but I think you are extrapolating way too far. > An…

Genius bar solution: Wipe device. Every time.

That's the genius of it.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#155

Post by mistercow »

>And you can still run your old OSX apps on Mountain Lion.

Having been a small-scale Mac developer for many years, that really made me chuckle. Not since OS X 10.2 did Apple release a major upgrade that didn't break my apps and make me struggle to push an update out as quickly as possible to fix all the things that Apple broke. Apple has heard of deprecation, but they don't seem to really grok the concept.

If I had been developing for Linux, I could have simply tested on pre-release versions of the distros I wanted to support and would have been ready when the new versions were released. On OS X I would have had to have paid a prohibitive fee for that privilege.

In any case, this article made me happy. You see, for so many years, I used a Mac, and everybody said "Apple is on its last legs; the Mac will be dead in a few years". Apple had to scramble to compete, and that drove them to provide such a good product. But I knew that situation might not last forever, and I was right. After seeing the turn that Apple had taken over the last few years, I switched to an Ubuntu laptop six months ago.

It's refreshing, once again, to be using an OS that people are calling "dead".

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#156

Post by lobster45 »

I would have to say Apple killed Linix. As many others have noted here, OSX has improved to the point where many Unix admins run OSX and it runs the tools they have for their work. Also Mac hardware is better than PC hardware so you buy a macbook with OSX and you are happy.

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#157

Post by tylermenezes »

Way too true. I ended up going back to Windows, because the audio would frequently (3-4 times an hour) stop working on my laptop until I restarted pulseaudio. And that's on Ubuntu certified hardware...

Not to mention the problems we had with our streaming servers and ffmpeg. It turns out that there was a big flame war on libav vs ffmpeg, and someone from the libav camp managed to get the ffmpeg package marked as deprecated (it's not) and redirected to the libav package on Ubuntu's apt repo. So we're stuck either compiling from source or running our own repo. Seriously? (fwiw, the rationale is that libav pushes new versions more frequently)

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#158

Post by icebraining »

atirip wrote: post #127
diminish wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To stress out again; OS/X has the poorest hardware support for 3rd parties; even compared to Linux. Just "think different" and buy some hardware and you ll see what I mean..

Hardware? What hardware? Frankly, I havent bought nothing over last 10 years. I have laptop, you see...

Laptops are not hardware now?

Re: What killed the Linux desktop

#160

Post by lttlrck »

sjs wrote: post #146
rufugee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry..I strongly disagree. You have me on the video support...OS X does a much better job there. You even have a point on audio drivers...they can be a pain at times. But design? Gnome 3 and Unity to me are FAR superior to OS X in terms of UI experience. YMMV of course. I bought a Macbook, gave it a fair shot, and it ended up being a dust collector simply because the desktop experience was painful compared to Ub…

It sounds like you expected a clone of Windows and were predictably disappointed. > I got maybe three hours of the supposed 7 hour battery You should have taken it back. Seriously. > Perhaps I'm set in my ways You hit the nail on the head here. There's nothing wrong with that but most of your complaints amount to "this is not what I am used to". > the absolute insanse window switching behavior On Windows and Linux I…

Much like the Mac OS menu bar; drove me nuts stuck at the top of the screen like that, but a lot of people like it and I can understand that...
Post reply on HN