> Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
Duh, because you don't need desktop, you need WM
Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
331–340 of 472 posts
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#332[deleted]
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#333I find it hard to understand why someone would take the time and effort to write something like this.
I can assure you 'linux' works just fine on the desktop (something I have done for a couple decades), and while there is some truth to the security and funding challenges, I find taking the article seriously difficult given the current alternatives.
Both Microsoft and Apple are openly trying to force you into their vision of computing, which is pedicated on their control and profit.
I have machines that run Windows and MacOS, but those both get worse every year, while Debian (and other distros) get slightly better.
I can run many AAA games on Proton, have access to the best development tools available, and am granted choice everywhere.
I can't even log in with a local only account on the latest version of Windows, and MacOS makes it harder and harder to install my own software (unless I pay them a tax, via a yearly dev account payment.
Linux is closer to the way forward, we just aren't there yet.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When I see the articles I believe the title should be "Linux is not Windows so I do not like it". I've used Linux for as much only I'm a tad more humble. Mentioned more than a dozen times in the kernel git log. Not a big achievement but kinda shows I'm not just a bystander. You've never said how much time you've wasted fixing Linux or making software work. Must be a non-issue I guess.
> I'm a tad more humble. Mentioned more than a dozen times in the kernel git log. Exceptionally humble, indeed. > You've never said how much time you've wasted fixing Linux or making software work. This comes up often and I'm always fascinated by the implied assumption that time isn't wasted fixing Windows or MacOS computers and making software work on those systems. The age-old "No, I will not fix your computer!" is…
Could you be specific about what constitutes "a rant"?
And no I've spent far less time "fixing" Windows. In fact I don't remember doing that ever. I've had multiple cases when Windows stopped booting and in absolute most of them I just had to reinstall the system from scratch. That's all "I've wasted".
Linux on the other hand?
"It works for you everything is made up in the article".
Never mind how once I had to fix a glaring issue in the Linux kernel which rendered tens of thousands of systems unbootable and which took me over 24 hours of hard work to unravel.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206175
Yeah, indeed I've never had anything like that in Windows in 30+ years that I've been using it. Never once a Windows update rendered the system completely dead. And I'm not talking about my system, I talking about hundreds.
Lastly I'm just a poor Linux kernel bugzilla maintainer who actually overlooks a lot of stuff and sees a staggering number of fixes in every stable Linux release.
I follow way too many bug trackers and LKML as well. It's all good, please disperse.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I mean, that's just false. Most drivers are done as kernel modules and you can push/pull them in without missing a beat. 0.1% of people in the world could that. 0.001% of people in the world would do that. That's not false, your understanding of a decent OS is just lacking. In Windows you can swap drivers however you want given they support your Windows version.
You assume Windows is a decent OS. Many who know better would not.
I have no assumptions.
Windows is installed on 2 billion PCs, give or take. It works great on them, too. Long gone are the days of malware waves or driver failures that break the system.
Linux is on 40 millions.
And the amount of pain I see daily on Linux-related forums trumps Windows' woes by an insane margin.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have lots of ten year old Android apps running on my Android 14 without too many issues. In Wine/Windows I run Windows applications from the 90s. In Windows 11 64 you can install and use Office 97. In Linux nothing even close is possible. People do care about old applications. They really do.
This is untrue. You can run old Linux binaries on modern Linux systems if you have the older libraries. You want to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH to point to where the old libraries are located. By the way, any Android applications using Google’s old messaging APIs no longer work and need to be rewritten to use fire base. I know people who were bitten by that multiple times since Google had to keep reinventing push notificatio…
> This is untrue. You can run old Linux binaries on modern Linux systems if you have the older libraries.
Again, 0.01% of people in the world could do it, 0.0001% would do it.
That's all you need to know about Linux compatibility.
And don't get me started on LD_LIBRARY_PATH not working for glibc but you conveniently "forgot" about that.
Compatibility "exists" except when it doesn't and it's extremely hard to achieve even if you're a professional.
In other words it doesn't exist.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
There won't be one. I've said it all. I was thinking about adding a "Security" section but I wasn't convinced it was necessary. Security in Linux is horrible in general. * People use `sudo` for anything and everything all the time. * `git pull whatever_crap_from_the_web` and run it happily. * Tens of thousands of pieces of malware via NPMs and other frameworks. * No AV of any kind (the one that actually executes code…
Verifying arbitrary code is safe is not possible for AV to do. If you know some way to do what you describe, you can commercialize it and become rich. Many would pay top dollar for such technology.
Virtualization and sandbox environment code execution have been available for years now in multiple Windows AVs. And it works great.
Linux on the other hand has absolutely nothing and it's still "OK".
"Windows is not perfect and thus Linux is OK". I've heard that way too many times. Sorry, doesn't work for me.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
You cannot statically compile a lot of stuff. Too many Linux libraries are GPLed, and that only works for open source applications. And then one day the underlying libraries will have security problems. Your statically linked application has just become a gaping hole. And finally, you don't want your statically compiled binary to be hundreds of megabytes and take forever to launch, do you? But seeing how many people…
Not many libraries use the GPL because “that only works for open source applications”. That said, you can just copy the .so files if you want to run the old binary. Furthermore, binaries are mmapped, so even if it is very large, it will still launch relatively quickly since only the parts needed to launch are read into memory.
LD_LIBRARY_PATH again?
Can you stop for a second and realize your "solutions" are absolute unmitigated crap and 99.999% of people of the world wouldn't bother even if they could?
In Windows you don't have to do that. You can compile an application in Windows 11 and run it in Windows XP for Christ's sake (if you don't use new Windows APIs).
Show me a way to compile anything in Ubuntu 24 using only its own libraries and have it run in Ubuntu 6, huh? Without virtualizating/chrooting/crap like that. No, you can't? Fine.
> Not many libraries use the GPL
Let me start: Qt. Before your spew "GTK", who is going to pay for porting the code to GTK/GTKMM (since GTK is C only)?
End of your wonderful story. You really want to bend reality to make Linux look "OK". It's not. It's bad.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, look up the author's name. Look at their contributions to the Linux kernel, GCC, KDE, Wine, and many other projects. A total clickbait for sure.
I have commits in half the projects you mentioned and I think the article is FUD. There are technically wrong points in it, such as the claim that you cannot run old Linux binaries on modern Linux. People are able to run old binaries on Linux that are 30 years old, although it requires copies of the old libraries those binaries need. If the guy actually is involved with so many projects, he would know this. The guy e…
You've not read the article at all and it explains full well what constitutes an OS.
The Linux kernel is NOT an OS.
Any given Linux distro which is not compatible with any other Linux distro or even its own earlier or later versions couldn't be called an OS. It's a software compilation for a certain time period.
An OS implies everyone runs it, anyone can compile software for it and have it run on all devices with this OS. This is impossible with Linux outside of Snap/FlatPak/AppImage which themselves are lightweight virtualization solutions.
This is what Windows, MacOS, iOS and Android are. Linux is not.
Also, please don't throw FUD around without explaining yourself. You probably don't even know/remember what it means any more.
Re: Why Linux is not ready for the desktop, the final edition
#340Are Dell’s like this encompassed by that article? https://www.dell.com/en-us/search/linux … What about System76? It seems like the article makes blanket statements that might apply if you’re building your own desktop and expecting tons of software to work … for free.
Would it be right to use the above devices with no additional installs as a benchmark? And then just compare ongoing updates & upgrades to macOS & Windows.
It seems like all modern OSes ship with the core apps you really need. Yes, if they do that you might have some bloat; and need or want to uninstall. But maybe the best OS is as opinionated as the author…