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

Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

linuxfonts.narod.ru

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 384 posts

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#231

Post by archimedespi »

archimedespi wrote: post #118
Animats wrote: post #62

He's right. Many of the driver problems come from the fact that Linux finally worked on the desktop about the time desktop machines were replaced by laptops. Desktops with slots tended to have relatively well-defined hardware, and plugging in third party hardware was normal. This is much less true for laptops. OS development for laptops requires that laptop. It needs a Q/A organization which has one of everything you…

> The monolithic Linux kernel is just too big. What is it now, 20,000,000 lines? There's no hope of debugging that. It shows. The Linux kernel is about 20MSLOC. The Windows kernel is about 50MSLOC. IIRC, OS X used to be ~80KSLOC. Problems with debugging are endemic to any monolithic kernel. Neither Windows nor OS X is easier to debug technologically , but Microsoft and Apple both have many employees and lots of money…

Oops, I meant ~80MSLOC for OS X.

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#232

Post by ris »

ris wrote: post #230
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QNX4 is high throughput, mister. Other contenders include eMCOS and FFMK, though those are obscure. That said, I don't even understand the logic. HPC clusters where single-percentage overheads really matter are an extremely specialized use case, so of course COTS u-kernels might not cut it. Where's the shocker here? Response to added: Not necessarily with message passing properly integrated with the CPU scheduler. Re…

"QNX4 is high throughput, mister." Ok then, show me the server farms... I'm not even really talking about HPC, just the massive datacentres that run everyone's lives. All for the most part running monolithic kernels. I doubt the thousands of engineers who work on such systems consider the "huge monolithic kernel" "undebuggable". And I don't see examples of microkernel OSs that are able to cut it in these circumstance…

(response to 2:) Er, so bypassing the microkernel for the vast majority of your work is a vindication of the "microkernels are just better" line is it?

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#233

Post by vezzy-fnord »

ris wrote: post #232
ris wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"QNX4 is high throughput, mister." Ok then, show me the server farms... I'm not even really talking about HPC, just the massive datacentres that run everyone's lives. All for the most part running monolithic kernels. I doubt the thousands of engineers who work on such systems consider the "huge monolithic kernel" "undebuggable". And I don't see examples of microkernel OSs that are able to cut it in these circumstance…

(response to 2:) Er, so bypassing the microkernel for the vast majority of your work is a vindication of the "microkernels are just better" line is it?

It's not bypassing the microkernel. It's using it either as a hypervisor or as a separation kernel [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_kernel

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#234

Post by craftkiller »

Paul_S wrote: post #194
craftkiller wrote: post #113

Hopefully the author is reading this: fix your ads! I can't even read 1 sentence on an android phone before your ads do full page redirects to spam. Completely unusable.

Not to excuse the owner but a friendly tip - use adblocking (Android uses a hosts file too!). Also helps with the rest of the Internet.

I've considered it before, but I've been avoiding using it on my phone out of some sense of social obligation. After my experience with this site, I think you're right and its time for me to put on ad blocking on mobile also. Its really a shame that a few irresponsible websites have to ruin it for everyone.

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#235

Post by veddox »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #153

Linux users often take the idea of 'self-examination' way too far and it turns into 'self-disparagement'. The fact is, if you vet your hardware and use a major distro (Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, Fedora) you'll wind up with a perfectly functioning Linux desktop or laptop. You think about it, OSX only runs on a few laptops. Linux runs perfectly on more laptops than exist for OSX. Windows run on many laptops, more often than not…

I don't think this is about self-disparagement, but about holding ourselves to a high standard. I love Linux, and have been using it without major problems for some time now (mainly Ubuntu-based distros). Especially if you are into programming, I'd say it beats MS hands down.

However, I do acknowledge that there are still many problems that bar Linux from being an operating system "for the masses" (i.e. all those people who are not computer nerds). Many small problems can be fixed with a few commands in terminal - but which grandmother/stressed office worker/gamer kid is willing to learn how to use a UNIX shell or configure fstab just to do their stuff? And there are other problems that aren't solved as easily. I help out at the Ubuntu Forums, and I see plenty of posters with problems that the combined wisdom of a few thousand experienced Linux users can't solve. (Just have a look at the "Unanswered Posts" section.)

So yes, Linux is a fantastic OS with great software available, and by all means let's keep advertising it. But let's not pretend that "it just works, right out of the box!"(TM) every time.

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#236

Post by vezzy-fnord »

ris wrote: post #222
pjmlp wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also quite telling that micro-kernel haters fail to acknowledge that they won in the embedded space and software systems for high integrity deployments.

I... never said anything about these spaces, which I suspect you would agree require significantly different kernel design from a "desktop system" which is what this topic is supposedly about.

"Desktop system" is vague, but obviously u-kernels can serve as workstations, and hence desktops. CTOS was a major example of its day, if not the purest possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_Technologies_Operat...

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#237

Post by PaulHoule »

linuxhansl wrote: post #121
PaulHoule wrote: post #3

This is a situation that hasn't changed much since 1996 and the story of why it hasn't changed is a lot more interesting than a large enumeration of the faults. To compare it to Windows, Windows really has evolved a lot since the bad old days. Linux beat the pants off Windows 3.1 completely. Both Win95 and WinNT were unstable -- Win2K was the first decent version of Windows. Linux 2.6 was the one really important thi…

That simply isn't true. The Kernel is just one aspect of a Linux distribution. The part that is most responsible for supporting H/W. It has evolved a lot since 1996. Whenever I try I find the range of supported H/W is larger than Windows and (obviously) Apple. On other fronts things have changes radically: Video, Sound, 3D/GL, GUI (KDE, Gnome), printing, etc, etc.

It has all changed and it is all busted.

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#238

Post by mystikal »

ris wrote: post #216
mystikal wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are zillions of academic solutions that if implemented properly would be better than the industrial version. Academics are just notoriously bad at building real-world systems. I think this is mostly because it's a waste of time and money as far as publications are concerned.

This is basically the "everyone's a dumbass" argument.

I didn't say people in industry weren't smart. There's plenty of stuff that gets published at conferences where the industry guys are like, we did that 15 years ago.

My argument is that there's lots of great-in-theory but untested-in-practice stuff in academia, and that you can't discount something altogether just because it's untested. It's hardly fair to compare the output of a few grad students over a few years with all of the effort that goes into a major industrial product.

And anyway, the architecture of Linux originated in academia too.

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#239

Post by Sanddancer »

ris wrote: post #214
jacquesm wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QnX.

High throughput. As I've said elsewhere, realtime != high throughput. Just deterministic throughput. Users of these systems are willing to use slightly overpowered hardware if it means hitting processing deadlines.

For the desktop, most users care about responsiveness, not throughput. That high throughput Linux kernel makes it utterly craptastic for professional audio usage, with insane amounts of latency. Of course, that has more to do with ALSA being a steaming pile than the kernel in general, but it's one example that shows throughput isn't the only thing that matters /especially/ on the desktop.

Re: Major Linux Problems on the Desktop, 2016 Edition

#240

Post by simoncion »

ggreer wrote: post #228
simoncion wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Beware. I went out of my way to get an Ubuntu certified laptop[1]. It took me months to get it to a usable state. Why didn't you return it and get -say- a Thinkpad? (Were you -perhaps- just curious how shitty the "Ubuntu Certified Laptop" program is?) It clearly failed the "Fitness for advertised purpose" test. AFAIK -if you're in the US- the seller can't refuse to accept your return... unless it was sold as-is. >…

> Why didn't you return it and get -say- a Thinkpad? The Lenovo X140e is a ThinkPad.[1] I didn't blindly trust Ubuntu's certification. I made sure to get a brand that historically has had good Linux support. I also knew about Nvidia graphics and avoided them. Still, I got burned. I don't doubt your checklist is good advice for buying a Linux laptop, but it's simply too time consuming to check all of those things. Eve…

> The Lenovo X140e is a ThinkPad.

Oh, heh. Derp. Edit: I mean to say: My bad. I overlooked that. :(

I see at [0] that the only Ubuntu Certified configuration is with a rather ancient pre-installed version of Ubuntu. Did you get the system in that configuration, or did you purchase it and put Linux on it? [1]

Regardless. Why didn't you return it and get something that worked? Curiosity? Cussedness?

> [I]t's simply too time consuming to check all of those things.

Odd. I find it reasonable to spend between a couple of days to a week researching the suitability of something that I'll use throughout the day, every single day for next three-to-ten years. Perhaps my opinion is atypical.

> Considering the number of hardware devices (Bluetooth, wifi, mic, camera(s), trackpad, GPU, fan, power saving, etc.) it's all but certain something will go wrong.

I guess I've had fantastic luck with my personal selections and the recommendations that I've given to others. Given that luck is my super power, I'm somewhat willing to believe that my experience is somewhat atypical. :)

Anyway. Good luck with your projects and such, and I hope that Apple keeps producing hardware that meets your needs.

[0] http://www.ubuntu.com/certification/hardware/201309-14195/

[1] Still... one would expect that any Ubuntu Certified Laptop that has a supported hardware configuration would be detected by the Ubuntu installer and configured appropriately (or you'd get a big fat warning when the hardware isn't "supported" by a later Ubuntu release). OTOH, Canonical isn't the best at getting things right, so... :-/

Post reply on HN