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

Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 116 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#101

Post by tomrod »

crossroadsguy wrote: post #75
tomrod wrote: post #12

My family and I have used Linux desktops since 2008, when Windows Vista failed to run full screen video with BSOD. There was a learning curve for a few months, but I've never regretted the shift and it has made for significant contributions to my career. YMMV.

I’m looking for a laptop. I can’t find any good laptop with 16-32GB RAM at a non-Apple price. Also they all have windows preinstalled. Defeats the purpose. That’s how it is.

I like my Dell XPS15. It came with Windows and runs Fedora flawlessly. I maxed out RAM, extra SSD, and GPU because I do a lot of ML consulting (AWS works well too, but its nice to have my own hardware).

Much cheaper than Apple. I use an Apple 2015 MBP for a client's requirements. It screws up my muscle memory. The OS is ok I suppose but it's no Linux.

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#102

Post by throwaway77388 »

crossroadsguy wrote: post #75
tomrod wrote: post #12

My family and I have used Linux desktops since 2008, when Windows Vista failed to run full screen video with BSOD. There was a learning curve for a few months, but I've never regretted the shift and it has made for significant contributions to my career. YMMV.

I’m looking for a laptop. I can’t find any good laptop with 16-32GB RAM at a non-Apple price. Also they all have windows preinstalled. Defeats the purpose. That’s how it is.

There's Tuxedo computers and System76.

https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en

https://system76.com/

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#103

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

hs86 wrote: post #55
bawolff wrote: post #19

What he's saying is true, but also i think the app-store type approach that apt-get provides is a major benefit. With windows i have to find some random program, hope its not malware, possibly pay for it, etc. With linux, i have reasonable assurance that packages (from main repos) aren't evil, they are free (as in beer), and i can easily search through and find something for my usecase. I can't really do that in wind…

Having a system-wide package manager where nearly all libraries are dynamically linked also has its drawbacks. A seemingly minor update might cause a huge cascade of dependency updates which causes common Linux distributions to tend to one of these two extreme solutions: Either fix all packages in place and freeze their version numbers or just "give up" and update everything all the time. Both solutions feel like com…

Right, Windows is totally stable and an OS update would never break basic functionality [0] or delete peoples' files [1].

[0] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/03/blue-screen-of-the-d...

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/10/microsoft-suspends-d...

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#104

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

cl0ckt0wer wrote: post #30
tachyonbeam wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched to Linux around the same time as you. Before that I was a Windows user from 1997 until ~2008. In the late 1990s and early 2000s people just accepted that Windows crashing everyday was a normal feature of that software, and they blamed every crash on user error, eg: "your drivers are bad", "you're running buggy software", etc. My Windows 98 install couldn't run for more than ~4 hours without crashing, it wa…

because printer/scanners don't work with the included software, and linux has a reputation.

No, printers/scanners work without the manufacturer's software; if it's supported (which, I admit, is incomplete but more than you might expect), you just plug it in, tell CUPS to add a printer (which it can do seamlessly without installing extra garbage from the manufacturer), open Simple Scan (or any other SANE frontend) and off you go.

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#105

Post by candiodari »

skohan wrote: post #25
bawolff wrote: post #19

What he's saying is true, but also i think the app-store type approach that apt-get provides is a major benefit. With windows i have to find some random program, hope its not malware, possibly pay for it, etc. With linux, i have reasonable assurance that packages (from main repos) aren't evil, they are free (as in beer), and i can easily search through and find something for my usecase. I can't really do that in wind…

I totally agree. This is one of the things that makes Windows feel like a second-tier OS to me compared with Linux and Mac. If I have to do something "tech-y", on Linux or Mac, I look for it in the package registry. I trust that action would probably have been taken by the community if it were doing something malicious, and usually I can find the project on github and peruse the source if I really want. By contrast o…

uh ... doesn't brew support windows ?

https://chocolatey.org/ https://brew.sh/2019/02/02/homebrew-2.0.0/

Also in general I would say windows is not lacking for software registries. Or software.

https://portableapps.com/apps

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#106

Post by smackeyacky »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #56
pjmlp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strange, because I can do it, https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/apps/windows https://chocolatey.org/

Chocolatey is like 10x slower than Linux package management.

Also the worst named package manager ever. I wanted to play with an RTOS for an embedded system a few weeks ago an the first step was "install chocolatey".

Not knowing what it was, I had to spend some time reading about chocolatey.

I know it must be some 3rd generation pun or something but it really put me off going any further. Names are important.

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#107

Post by intc »

ramchip wrote: post #31
intc wrote: post #23

We have Linux on all desktops and laptops. This has been the case for more than 10 years by now. There are still a couple Windows VM's (mainly for checking how some things work on Windows in case need be).

Who's "we"?

https://fennosys.fi/

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#108

Post by happyjack »

I run RHEL 7 desktop, because it's what my vendors support (scientific / engineering desktop applications, simulators). I'm about to get a new Thinkpad, and highly considering running Fedora because packages on it weren't written in 2002 (sarcasm) and use it side by side to my RHEL 7 dekstop, even if some of my work applications won't run on it.

Linus is completely correct, though. I think the open source world has gotten way to mixed up with the "free" world. I understand that gcc and some of the HUGE packages are free and open source. They are cost shared by companies and have many people that use them and are maintained well. But other packages with small user bases? His dive example was perfect. Unless someone uses it personally, how can you expect to maintain it unless you pay for it? Or, if the software is paid, how can you expect the company to maintain it for Linux, when their user base is going to be for Mac / Windows?

I think Ubuntu LTS is the most sane approach I've seen. You can get relatively new packages in a pretty stable environment. It's not RHEL stable, and Canonical is starting to care less and less about desktop Linux, but it's not too bad. Ubuntu needs Vanilla gnome option by default, though. Their default look is horrendous. I know I know, it's Linux, you can customize it! Why should I have to waste my time?

Re: Linus Torvalds on why desktop Linux sucks (2014)

#110

Post by rektide »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #48
sascha_sl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you'd like Nix.

I’m not the GP but I for one am quite sure I would love Nix. ...just, well, not quite enough that I want to spend time learning how to use it. :/

I feel similarly. It seems to have a lot of good things going for it.

When I first investigated it like a decade ago, one majorly offputting aspect about it is that I didn't see it as offering the capability to install multiple copies of things. I greatly prefer systems where i can blue-green deploy services locally, or otherwise have special purpose instances, and Nix, at the time, didn't seem to have much interest in that. I believe things have changed a lot in that regard, or perhaps my couple hours spent as an utter neophyte poking around for answers didn't surface the clues.

I would say that, these days, I am far less interested in configuring a system. I am far less interested in the desktop. To me, my time is 100% not worth investing in these goals. I am trying to focus on working with & orchestrating a fleet of machines, in a coordinated fashion. I believe free-software folks should all be re-investing, re-focusing similarly, in running & operating personal/manorial/federalized "cloud" systems. I happen to agree with a lot of the philosophy of Kubernetes- a desired state management system for resources, and controller/operators that autonomically enact & maintain that state- and invest my time & work trying to make it an useful fabric for my & hopefully my friends digital homes.

Post reply on HN