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

The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

blog.bitquabit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 106 posts

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#61

Post by psadauskas »

cschwarm wrote: post #43
psadauskas wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the philosophy of those distros such as Debian, Ubunutu and Fedora: Don't upgrade anything except security patches between releases. If you want the bleeding edge packages, you need to install it yourself from an add-on repo (once you set it up, its just as easy as `apt-get install newpkg`. Or, pick a rolling-release distro that caters more towards having the latest packages available, such as Gentoo or Ar…

That's just an explanation, not a reason. Why does it have to be like that? Why does Linux distributions fall in one of two categories: either "stable foundation and out-dated apps" or "unstable foundation and recent apps"? What many people want is a stable foundation and recent apps. This is easier to get with a decentral installation system.

Who's foundation? I'm a web developer, so to me, I want the latest ruby, apache, etc... However, a server admin might want the more "stable" versions of the same.

I know that Gentoo, at least, has the facility to accomplish this. They have package masking, so you can specify exactly the packages you want to be kept on the bleeding edge. Taken a step further, you can set up your own "profile", and list exactly what version of each package in the system you want. Arch Linux provides something similar; you can list what versions a package shouldn't be upgraded past in a config file.

I'm sorry, but there's nothing "easy" about having to watch 50 RSS feeds or twitter uses to know when there's a new version of an app I might want, downloading it manually, and clicking next through their installer. Setting up a few config files and doing `pacman -Syu` is orders of magnitude easier.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#62

Post by ThomPete »

frodwith wrote: post #25

At least for me, usability isn't the point of free software. I want my free software to be usable, yes, and usability should be a goal for the development teams, but the overriding benefit of free software is that it is free. It puts the power back in my hands as an end user. Even if I don't have the technical skills to make use of that freedom, the freedom is important. This is something that "closed-source" applica…

I disagree. That software is free might be an excuse for why not waste time on the usability, but it sure ain't a good reason if you want more than developers to use it.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#63

Post by krschultz »

0xdefec8 wrote: post #50
sophacles wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, you're actually saying that: 1. Someone still makes non-standard cd-roms? 2. Someone else still buys them? After learning you are person #2, why would anyone ever trust any other judgement you make?

and therein lies the predictable attitude that will keep linux a distant 3rd on the desktop.

Linux users have no need to court people like you. We're not a business, market share is a meaningless metric. I don't care if 1% or 100% of the people using computers use Linux, what I care about is if there are enough people working on the projects to make it usable for ME. There are.

People who complain about FOSS community's "attitude" should really check their own sense of entitlement. We are talking about you getting something FREE that costs hundreds of thousands of man hours to make. If it takes you more than one try to get it to install then think of that as the cost to enter instead of the $150 you pay Microsoft

(incidentally Windows suffers similar problems on my home desktops SATA controller as you describe having under Linux, it is not a Linux thing it is a shitty hardware thing).

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#64

Post by psadauskas »

tedunangst wrote: post #36
ori_b wrote: post #4

Strangely enough, I'm using Linux precisely because proprietary software is painful to use. For example, searching for software with google to download it, trying to determine if the source is reliable, and clicking through a manual installer is way too tedious - it should be at my fingertips. Also, at least when compared to Windows (where everyone and his brother seems to feel the need for a custom and flashy toolki…

"Linux" is only uniform if you stick exclusively to gnome or kde apps. Just try running firefox (gtk) on kde (qt). The file selector dialogs don't even look the same.

Who cares? The purpose of a file selector is to select a file, not look like every other file selector in existence. Even on Windows, the Office file selector looks nothing like the Photoshop one, or the Firefox one, or the Notepad one.

At least in open source, you can hack it however you want. In fact, its fairly simple to make Firefox use the KDE file picker: Enter "about:config" in the address bar, look for the "ui.allow_platform_file_picker" key and change its value to "false". ( http://www.gentoo-wiki.info/HOWTO_Integrate_Firefox_with_KDE... )

Edit: I was incorrect, the method I linked won't make firefox use the KDE picker, just an alternate gtk picker. But there are ways that can be found with a little bit of googling.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#65

Post by krschultz »

cschwarm wrote: post #43
psadauskas wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the philosophy of those distros such as Debian, Ubunutu and Fedora: Don't upgrade anything except security patches between releases. If you want the bleeding edge packages, you need to install it yourself from an add-on repo (once you set it up, its just as easy as `apt-get install newpkg`. Or, pick a rolling-release distro that caters more towards having the latest packages available, such as Gentoo or Ar…

That's just an explanation, not a reason. Why does it have to be like that? Why does Linux distributions fall in one of two categories: either "stable foundation and out-dated apps" or "unstable foundation and recent apps"? What many people want is a stable foundation and recent apps. This is easier to get with a decentral installation system.

Because the "foundation" can't be seperated from the apps that way. What is that foundation? What are the apps that need to be bleeding edge. What if I don't care what version of Firefox I have, but I must have the newest version of some tool or language. But now I get a buggy RC of Firefox and it crashes a lot. I consider Firefox to be foundation for me because I just don't care about it. But you may want Firefox 1.5 to be available TODAY. It is best to aim for bleeding edge or stability, because if you try to have both you will just have total instability.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#66

Post by [deleted] »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #30
orblivion wrote: post #6

Firstly, open source does (or can easily) have one big usability advantage: installing things, assuming it's on a repository, is much easier. Or, at least, it's very close to there; I haven't asked a lay user how useful they find the "Add Application" menu in Gnome. But assuming it's not already done right, once it is, that's a huge advantage. Secondly, so we've admitted that non-company-backed open source projects c…

I'm primarily a Windows user, having just recently installed Ubuntu onto a netbook. Obviously I'm carrying old habits and baggage, but from my point of view, finding and installing stuff in the repository is a nightmare. On one hand, I can see how putting it there makes a unified update system possible. But the system does nothing for me in helping me discover what I need. To learn of the existence of a tool, I still…

[deleted]

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#67

Post by krschultz »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #30
orblivion wrote: post #6

Firstly, open source does (or can easily) have one big usability advantage: installing things, assuming it's on a repository, is much easier. Or, at least, it's very close to there; I haven't asked a lay user how useful they find the "Add Application" menu in Gnome. But assuming it's not already done right, once it is, that's a huge advantage. Secondly, so we've admitted that non-company-backed open source projects c…

I'm primarily a Windows user, having just recently installed Ubuntu onto a netbook. Obviously I'm carrying old habits and baggage, but from my point of view, finding and installing stuff in the repository is a nightmare. On one hand, I can see how putting it there makes a unified update system possible. But the system does nothing for me in helping me discover what I need. To learn of the existence of a tool, I still…

You are over complicating the matter.

I agree that finding the right tool is sometimes hard because there are so many options. My general rule is open up the package manager (System->Administration->Synaptic Package Manager) and search for what I need. Then I google the 3 or 4 options and see what people recommend, and just install that one.

I just let Uninstall do its thing, if it misses a few pieces it doesn't really matter. If it really bothers you just use Purge instead of Uninstall.

As for repositories, again you are overcomplicating matters. You really just need to know if it is in the repositories you have connected or not, you might have 40 repositories by default but it doesn't matter which it is in to you. I generally add 1, max 2 repositories to my machine but thats it.

You also don't need the public keys, you can just hit YES when it asks if you want to use it, though I am sure that is not recommended. Generally the instructions just include a command to copy and paste into the command line i.e. Medibuntu's instructions.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#68

Post by 0xdefec8 »

krschultz wrote: post #63
0xdefec8 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and therein lies the predictable attitude that will keep linux a distant 3rd on the desktop.

Linux users have no need to court people like you. We're not a business, market share is a meaningless metric. I don't care if 1% or 100% of the people using computers use Linux, what I care about is if there are enough people working on the projects to make it usable for ME. There are. People who complain about FOSS community's "attitude" should really check their own sense of entitlement. We are talking about you g…

Keep beating that strawman, you're sure to make a point eventually.

The argument isn't whether or not Linux is useful to a bunch of nerds, myself included, or whether or not I should kiss rms for bestowing this gift unto humanity for free. It's whether it's competitive against its better known closed source counterparts on the Desktop. And you basically answered that question in your first paragraph.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#69

Post by teilo »

indiejade wrote: post #59
access_denied wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GIMP and Inkscape are not ready for prime-time. (And as always at this point: They lack proper support for CMYK, Fonts, Color-Management, Workflow in big publishing and printing shops.) Never mind the usability desaster that the GIMP represents for anyone who is accustomed to PS.

Nah. It is possible to make professional-quality, shiny, colorful graphics with GIMP if you know what you're doing. Sure, installing the non-default fonts (that is, not having a one-button install method) and configuring everything is what prevents most people from adopting it. There are graphic designers who are graphic designers, and then there are web developers who are also graphic designers. Have a look at what…

You miss the point. The Gimp and Inkscape, as for as they go, are great tools - if you care about nothing but the Web.

They are in no way, shape, or form, ready for the print production environment. Not even close.

Re: The One in Which I Say Open Source Software Sucks

#70

Post by rbanffy »

sethg wrote: post #3
davidw wrote: post #2

To be fair, people have been saying that for years, and slowly but surely, open source has been marching on. 10 years ago, no way, no how would Linux be even considered for desktop use. Now? A few people on this site have parents using it. Not there yet? Could be. It will be, though. One of the signs of a 'not good enough' disruptive innovation is that the rate of improvement of the new thing is greater than existing…

I think one reason Linux user interfaces have been catching up with Windows (if not Mac) is that for the past ten years or so, desktop-app usability has remained stagnant (or, in the case of MS Office, regressed). Twenty years ago, Apple and Microsoft had to convince non-geek consumers that personal computers were worth buying, and so they had an incentive to make their products as usable as possible (given the const…

"Linux user interfaces have been catching up with Windows (if not Mac)" is a common misconception.

I love the tabbed file system views in Gnome. It's much more comfortable than the Finder. Windows Explorer too is simply terrible. I have been using Windows at work and Gnome at home and can't even begin to decribe all the ways Windows is completely broken from a usability standpoint. People tolerate it because they know nothing different and/or are unwilling to learn.

In many aspects, Gnome and KDE have already surpassed Windows and OSX.

Post reply on HN