21–30 of 36 posts
I cannot take this seriously due to the poor grammar, I think this belongs in /r/linuxmemes.
You should checkout https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/, they are pretty selective about nationality. Might be something for you.
During the years since I use Linux I experienced some of those issues too. But many times when I came in contact with mainstream operating systems like Windows and MacOS I saw similar problems and thought many times: "Good to know that it isn't any better outside of the Linux world" Two extreme examples: - A Windows which takes 4 hours to upgrade itself, after it did a forced reboot on the day the bachelor thesis had…
I liked to play around with compiling kernel and install stuff from source to get a very personalised experience.
Now I just want to be an end user and have an OS which I install and majority of things work right out of the box, or at least they are easy to configure. So I can concentrate on other things.
A lot of times there is something that is missing from the UI and you have to dive deep just to have it fixed. Editing config files etc... Even just simple things as a touchpad sensitivity.
Not to mention some special stuff like handling a discrete GPU in a gaming laptop.
I want a distro that works well and has most of the configuration accessible in the UI so I don't have to hunt the internet for information about how to fix something on a particular distro with a particular version.
Ubuntu comes close to this dream, but not close enough.
Then use a dual boot with Windows. It's quite simple to set up. Linux is the best os for programming imo (especially if you develop software for Linux servers), so why not keep both?
Very few cases can't be covered by either WSL or a VM, and having dual-booted for years I can tell you that after a few days you get into the habit of only booting the more convenient OS most of the time. It's twice the maintenance and 5-15 minutes of context switching every time you need to do something else.
If by 'booting to the most convenient OS' you mean 'booting to the OS which does not usurp your machine for internal housekeeping purposes (plus a little side of snooping here and there 'to enhance your experience') the moment you switch it on that would surely mean booting to some variant of Linux? Windows seems to think it is more important to try to install the 1709 or 1803 update pack for the umpteenth time, try to stuff the 'Windows 10 update assistant' down unwilling users' throats, ignoring all those 'do not update' flags and settings they were told to hack into the registry. Where the OS can suddenly decide that you obviously are not using that FileHistory backup so let's remove it altogether. In other words, the OS which isn't at the whim of a supplier with an agenda different from yours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very few cases can't be covered by either WSL or a VM, and having dual-booted for years I can tell you that after a few days you get into the habit of only booting the more convenient OS most of the time. It's twice the maintenance and 5-15 minutes of context switching every time you need to do something else.
Ah, WSL... which gives you the best of both worlds: unpredictable and unreliable Windows updates combined with whatever grievances you have about Linux applications. If by 'booting to the most convenient OS' you mean 'booting to the OS which does not usurp your machine for internal housekeeping purposes (plus a little side of snooping here and there 'to enhance your experience') the moment you switch it on that would…
to sum it up: if you use a distro where you have to configure everything yourself it will be hard and things will break
I love ArchLinux, and used it on my primary dev laptop a while back. But you have to expect breaking changes that take some manual maintenance from time to time, and choose your update window accordingly. Maybe not really close to a conference presentation.
There isn't a shortage of distros, and the person could have chosen elsewhere on the spectrum according to needs.
After reading these gems: For long my opinion is that to be a real Linux user one should use as few GUI as possible and the Linux kernel is optimized for servers, not for desktops I can't tell if this is satire or not.
The author appears to be serious. His desire of being a 'True Kernel Developer' probably led him to google something like "best distribution for Linux Hacker", perhaps the first result was Arch. At some point our "Linux Hacker" probably started to feel confortable running pacman -Syu twice a day to be on the cutting edge.
MacOS also freezes a lot if your computer is about 3 years old. Won't even consider using macbooks older than that. Used Android studio and Robomongo on a couple year old Macbook and it would keep freezing now and then. The most painful 3 months on the job. So, problems exist on all OSes. The grass isn't lush green anywhere, it's a pale green everywhere.
I have been using Ubuntu on the desktop and laptop for 5 years and it has been stable. There have been problems, but I haven't run into anything show stopping yet. I haven't been doing this long but I believe that the key is to think about all the different ways things could go wrong and ensuring you handle a reasonable amount of them, without going too crazy about it.
eg: set up your demo on a digital ocean droplet (I do this when the demo doesn't have any GUI). create a throwaway SSH key and keep the private key handy (say email) and add the pub key to the droplet. if your laptop completely crashes, you still have your demo. slides backup is completely standard no matter what OS you have. so you have handled one of the worst possible cases :)