Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#171

Post by gjsman-1000 » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:31 AM UTC

do_not_redeem wrote: post #166

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“it's a miracle of modern software engineering and a testament of the power of collaboration and the free software movement that the Linux ecosystem works as well as it does” It can be a miracle, and yet still not be good enough. Even as a business user, knowing that if I build an app and it probably won’t work in 5 years, is all I need to know about this hobbyist toy. Linux is fundamentally not ready for anyone who…

> knowing that if I build an app and it probably won’t work in 5 years Would you say MacOS, Android, and iPhone are also hobbyist toys then? And by the way, if you statically compile your app for Linux it will basically work forever. Linus's mantra: We Do Not Break Userspace. These are userland problems and can all be avoided with a linker flag if it's a priority for you.

A statically compiled app that used Xorg won’t run on many Linux distributions at the moment.

A statically compiled app that used Jack for audio might have problems running on PipeWire.

A statically compiled app from 2012 that used PolicyKit for authorization might not work today when asking for sudo. Everyone’s moved on to polkit.

The meme is wrong, don’t regurgitate nonsense. I can guarantee you my Windows app compiled in 2007 still has the UAC prompt and the audio system working correctly.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#172

Post by zahlman » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:31 AM UTC

dismalaf wrote: post #149

Here's how you have a good experience: Use one of the following: - Fedora - Fedora Silverblue - Ubuntu - openSuse Aeon or Micro Leap Next, don't modify anything. Use the DE it comes with, never open the terminal, treat it like it's MacOS or Windows and you're your grandma. Then you'll have a good, solid desktop. The problem people have is using hobbyist distros like Mint, some flavour of Arch that's just a buggier Ar…

Mint being a "hobbyist" distro that provides a worse experience for regular users than Ubuntu is definitely a bespoke take. Nothing against my upstream as a Mint user, but the entire point of this distro is to get the "life's too short to configure stuff" things out of the way. I do do my fair share of "hobbyist" Linux config stuff, but it's stuff I could do on any distro.

> Or they modify shit because they saw it on some YouTube or blog.

The Youtube content about modifying Linux is overwhelmingly how-tos rather than advocacy. People are watching those videos and following those steps because they already wanted to make the modification.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#173

Post by scarface_74 » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:32 AM UTC

em-bee wrote: post #158

scarface_74 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other question is why should any normal person want to run Linux as their primary OS except for philosophical reasons? I was forced to use Windows for a year as a developer. I threw WSL2 on it and it was fine . I installed Docker desktop for Windows and it worked fine for Linux. But especially on the Mac, while I have to download updated commands, it is genuinely certified UNIX. On both Macs and Windows I also ge…

The other question is why should any normal person want to run Linux as their primary OS except for philosophical reasons? it's free. it's stable. it's easier to use. it doesn't have adds. it uses less resources. it runs on older hardware. it doesn't contain spyware. it doesn't violate my privacy. it includes more powerful features. it offers more alternatives for the GUI. i can trust it because the kernel has been a…

I still have to buy the computer so an OS being “free” is inconsequential and what does “using less resources” get me? Does your computer run for 16 hours+ on one charge? Does it run fast, quiet and cool like my MacBook Air?

By the way you can buy a brand new M1 MacBook Air from Walmart for $699. These are still being manufactured by Apple and distributed via third parties.

As far as “trusting it” because it has been audited, the Heartbleed bug was part of Linux for years before it was discovered.

What “more powerful features” does it have than a typical Mac?

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#174

Post by pshirshov » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:32 AM UTC

ChocolateGod wrote: post #113

pshirshov wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, Nvidia drivers only work well under Nix, because their native installer loves to mess stateful systems.

Running a .run to install the nvidia drivers is a very bad idea if your distro packages them, especially on NixOS (does it even work?)

> does it even work

No

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#175

Post by edoceo » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:32 AM UTC

foobiekr wrote: post #145

edoceo wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if the assertion was true, I'd be feeling those regressions at least monthly on my leading edge, unstable (~amd64), Gentoo box, that is my daily driver desktop I use at $DayJob. This box has been stable enough to make money. But not as stable as my backup (also Gentoo) which runs stable and updates weekly. Edit: my biggest source of stability issues are Nvidia drivers mis-matched from kernel. Takes a whole reboot…

No coder should ever, ever be shocked that broken code mostly kind of seems to work, especially if you don't notice things like file corruption because you're not looking, or memory corruption that doesn't happen to matter at the moment. A lot of the failures and bad code are in the unexpected path.

When this box does have issue (rare), it's right after I've done some upgrades to packages that the distribution has told me aren't ready. I know I'm standing on the edge (of glory!).

Also, I use ext4 since like forever, ext3 before that and have never had issues.

To be clear, my point is that these open source devs (I'm one too) are very careful to not regress. I think the software quality is very high.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#176

Post by pshirshov » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:33 AM UTC

layer8 wrote: post #169

pshirshov wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my case I managed to get working desktop in about 15 minutes without any prior Nix knowledge just by following their tutorial, then about 16 hours to read/learn/experiment and 8 more hours to complete my environment and 8 more to move my homelab to Nix. Since then I spend around two hours every six months to update and polish my flakes. Although Nix knowledge helped me tremendously in managing heterogenous codebas…

That doesn’t sound like something the average computer user would be able or willing to do.

There are plenty of options which would do for that average user.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#177

Post by zahlman » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:35 AM UTC

lbj wrote: post #24

I wonder who he keeps running into. Not only do I use Linux on a daily basis, I run about 20 virtual *nixs from that Linux desktop and everything runs really great, but when I run into problems, the Arch community (ie. colleagues, forums, mailing lists) have been nothing but extremely helpful and friendly. Without exception. Is Arch the exception?

Some people really hate when they ask a question that's answered in TFM and are answered by a link to an entire TFM page. There's a huge demand for "please help me understand exactly how this applies in my exact situation", especially for less technically-minded people.

The Mint forums are helpful enough, but they tend to demand tons of ultimately irrelevant system info up front, commonly misdiagnose problems, and give blanket advice that often ignores more detailed concerns. (Also, the site has been very unstable lately.)

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#178

Post by LeFantome » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:38 AM UTC

Linux has a stable API for gaming now and there are many AAA games available that target it. It is the Win32 API and DirectX. There is even kernel level support for some of it now.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#179

Post by do_not_redeem » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:42 AM UTC

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #171

do_not_redeem wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> knowing that if I build an app and it probably won’t work in 5 years Would you say MacOS, Android, and iPhone are also hobbyist toys then? And by the way, if you statically compile your app for Linux it will basically work forever. Linus's mantra: We Do Not Break Userspace. These are userland problems and can all be avoided with a linker flag if it's a priority for you.

A statically compiled app that used Xorg won’t run on many Linux distributions at the moment. A statically compiled app that used Jack for audio might have problems running on PipeWire. A statically compiled app from 2012 that used PolicyKit for authorization might not work today when asking for sudo. Everyone’s moved on to polkit. The meme is wrong, don’t regurgitate nonsense. I can guarantee you my Windows app comp…

What distro are you using that doesn't package Xwayland or pipewire-jack? Sure those are compatibility layers, but so is WoW64. The Linux and Windows backcompat strategies aren't all that different here.

Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition

#180

Post by yjftsjthsd-h » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 1:43 AM UTC

IgorPartola wrote: post #57

The main criticism I see as valid here is first point: software distribution is tricky. For macOS and Windows you basically have a model where you can go to a website, download a binary, install it, and it runs. Most Linux distros won’t jive with that very well. And because every Linux distro uses a different theme and one of a dozen UI libraries/DEs/etc. the downloaded GUI application will look bad because it won’t…

> And because every Linux distro uses a different theme and one of a dozen UI libraries/DEs/etc. the downloaded GUI application will look bad because it won’t fit in.

As opposed to, say, Windows, where there is only one GUI and one theme by one company so everything is perfectly match- wait, no, they have bits and pieces running every GUI they've every invented all the way back to the 90s ( https://www.dvhardware.net/article75347.html , or https://ntdotdev.wordpress.com/2021/02/06/state-of-the-windo... though that's old now ) and also lots of applications using QT or Electron or whatever just like on Linux. So clearly that's not the problem; if it's good enough for the most popular desktop OS, it can't be that bad.