Live data from Hacker News

Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

itvision.altervista.org

111–120 of 402 posts

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#111

I feel like a lot of the usability quirks that Linux has are trying to shoehorn a multi-user system into a single-user context. For example, there is so much work done (and even complaining in favor of doing that work in this article) to make it possible for multiple people to sit at the same computer. Nobody does that! Most people have more than one computer! Why do people spend their free time on that use case? Thi…

Right? The only reason user accounts exist at all in Desktop OSs is that all of them today were originally server OSs. Placing restrictions on user accounts is only useful for protecting the system from users, which is a valid concern on a network with shared resources but worse than useless on a personal desktop.

Mobile OSs got this right: on a personal device, the permissions model should be applied to the applications.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#112
post #16

> "most Windows 95 applications still run fine in Windows 10" Uhm, no. Not really. With hacks by the user (or OS) maybe, but if hacks are allowed then most of that list can be deleted.

Actually yeah, lots of software that was compiled for Windows 95 really does still run fine on Windows 10. Games are a big exception. What doesn't work is 16-bit Windows applications, at least not without DOSBox.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#113
post #82
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you have to live under the wing of your distro mantainers, instead of installing whatever you want from any third party. Isn't Linux supposed to be about freedom? Yes, you can install software using tarballs, but it's not usable for 90% of users, and not because of the distribution model, but because of the lack of standardization in a good, easy to use application-installing API.

I get the base OS along with a very long list of apps with any distro. For example Arch, Gentoo, Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Suse etc - all will curate a lot of apps for me. If I want to go off piste I download the code and crack on. I have several compilers to choose from LLVM, gcc int al out of the box. tarball installs is pretty much close to the state of Windows app installations. You have to find the bloody things,…

>tarball installs is pretty much close to the state of Windows app installations.

Except that they're hard to install for a novice user.

>You have to find the bloody things, download them each time and hope you have found the right one and not a trojaned one. Each one needs its own update routine and will not be updated when the rest of the system is updated.

None of those are problems for me, the actual problems are: installing all the dependencies and then executing the make commands. Both of those could be solved with a well designed API.

>The Windows and Apple software distribution model is archaic compared to all Linux/BSD etc distros.

The Windows and apple software distribution works for all my use cases, the Linux model doesn't (eg: if I want many versions of the same package, if I want a package that isn't included in the repos, etc).

Also, from a philosophical and aesthetical point of view, the Windows & Mac distribution model is better: you get your OS from the OS developer, and you get your specific-use applications from the developer of said application. You are not dependent on a single entity that supposedly knows what you need better than you.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#114
post #76
post #54

Linux as the open-sourced work of brilliant software developers wouldn't power most servers if it sucked. But could designing good desktops need more than just good code? Good kernels successfully run code. Good desktops successfully help users. I guess different goals require different designs? Edit: to clarify, I didn't mean desktops don't require well designed software. Just had in mind that a desktop also have to…

Wait, you are confounding some things. A software design is good when it allows all of its parts to be elegant and meet the requirements. In no way does that say that a desktop OS is required to be designed badly. Linux is powering servers and high performance computing because it is good at these things: mostly static hardware configuration, set up once during system installation high performance, modularity and the…

Just curious, but I had the same issues, turns our I didn't install gvfs and associated handlers for mounting unmounting drives. Turns out installing it resolved most of my USB connection issues

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you. The OS should give you only some essential end user applications (a bare-bones text editor, a terminal, a browser) and then the user should get their specific use applications (DAW, 3D modelling software, game engine, etc) from the application developer, not the OS maker.

We appear to be a dying breed. People who don't like walled gardens and middlemen between them and the people who make the tools they use.

There's not necessarily walls in the package manager model, in most cases it's possible to install binaries outside of the package manager.

It's just less convenient.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We appear to be a dying breed. People who don't like walled gardens and middlemen between them and the people who make the tools they use.

There's not necessarily walls in the package manager model, in most cases it's possible to install binaries outside of the package manager. It's just less convenient.

The same is true of the other walled gardens.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#118
"Linux has a 255 bytes limitation for file names (this translates to just 63 four-byte characters in UTF-8) - not a great deal but copying or using files or directories with long names from your Windows PC can become a serious challenge."

Not sure what he is speaking about.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#119
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, you are confounding some things. A software design is good when it allows all of its parts to be elegant and meet the requirements. In no way does that say that a desktop OS is required to be designed badly. Linux is powering servers and high performance computing because it is good at these things: mostly static hardware configuration, set up once during system installation high performance, modularity and the…

Just curious, but I had the same issues, turns our I didn't install gvfs and associated handlers for mounting unmounting drives. Turns out installing it resolved most of my USB connection issues

I know that there are solutions (I use KDE, so it works differently there). The point I am trying to make is that UNIX device files were never designed to deal with the dynamic hardware configuration we see today, especially on laptops with periphery gerting plugged in and yanked periodically. And some of the solutions, like gvfs, are overly complex user space workarounds. A system that accounts for these dynamic usage patterns would have to look differently. But it does by no means have to be ugly code. In fact, it would probably be much simpler and more elegant than the current Linux desktop user space.

Re: Linux Problems on the Desktop (2018)

#120
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the person you're replying to, but I fall in the same boat as them as far as Linux experience goes. And for me, I find I have way more trouble doing things on Windows/Mac than Linux. I think it's really more a way of thinking about how a "desktop OS" is supposed to work. People coming from Windows expect things to work the same, and that's just not the case. Likewise, when I unluckily find myself on some closed-s…

"This is a somewhat poor analogy, but it's sort of like a Chinese citizen (closed-source user) becoming a citizen of a democracy" I like that analogy (even though I am still looking for that pure democracy/open source government). In Linux you have the freedom to do allmost anything with the system, but you have to know what you are doing, as the system usually does not stop you, when you are about to do anything stu…

I like your expansion upon it :)

I definitely do agree that "onboarding" could be improved. How I dunno. To me at least, it seems like I hear a lot of success stories from the tails of the spectrum - power users and developers on one side / the complete opposite on the other. And then for everybody in the middle, there's no other way to put it than it's almost a shit show:

On the software side there a million and a half different ways to do everything, and often an insane amount of "noise"/outdated info that needs filtering through to find what's relevant to your specific needs. Even at the lowest levels of the stack there is no "the one way", and I think all that uncertainty (especially from the beginner perspective) can make it feel like climbing a mountain.

Hardware, as you mention, is tricky if you don't know what to look for (and why would most people). At least from a longtime Linux user's perspective, it's incredible how much better things have gotten (since the 2.2 days in my case). But there's a ways yet to go, and it's by far the roughest where it's the most visible (ie the trendy bleeding edge). Part of that is just the nature of "lag" in open source development between code getting written, released, and finally showing up in your distro. That cycle can sometimes take 6 or 8 months, especially for hardware :(

Not that this helps users with existing hardware, but

* definitely always google before you buy (model name + "linux" and read the first page or two of results)

* stick with a non-high-DPI resolution screen

* WiFi, I've had the best luck with Qualcomm/Atheros, Intel, and Realtek (in that order)

* Graphics, get AMD. NVidia cards can work well enough with their proprietary driver, but the out-of-the-box experience is crap. Intel works great too, as long as you don't need it for anything heavy.

* Audio, for me the last time I had trouble was with one of the earlier Sound Blaster Audigy cards. Have stuck with onboard codecs since and honestly never had a problem.

Post reply on HN