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

#401

Post by ryao » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #400

ryao wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The X.Org project is not deprecated. It handles both the X.Org X11 server and Wayland. That said, Linux has more users than Windows: https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/ Android Linux is at 46%, while Windows is at 26%. Other Linux versions have 1%.

Not a single Windows MacOS iOS Android user knows what their display server is and how it works. Xorg is being deprecated and replaced with semi-broken something where tons of functions only work in KDE and Gnome. That's all you need to know about Linux.

You are calling the Xorg X11 server Xorg, which is wrong. As someone who has “contributed” to so many projects, you should know that. In any case, it is odd you are whining about this considering that the article’s author is a well known X11 hater and you seem to agree with everything he says.

By the way, “Not a single Windows MacOS iOS Android user knows what their display server is and how it works” is both a non-sequitur and untrue. The guys who wrote the display servers used on those are users of those systems.

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

#402

Post by itvision » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:11 PM UTC

ryao wrote: post #389

itvision wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're just a hater. Yeah, with hundreds of contributions to multiple Linux projects including the Linux kernel, GCC, KDE, Wine, etc. A total hater. > How you have to tweak registry to remove the ad, but still can't get rid of OneDrives reminder, and then comes the forced updates. Takes roughly 2 minutes, ok. > Settings are spread in between millions of places, extremely confusing, and twisted. Not sure what you me…

How does one make hundreds of contributions to a number of important projects yet be so woefully ignorant about things as you are? In this discussion, you have claimed that Qt is under the GPL, said that running old software on Linux systems is impossible, claimed Windows runs near perfectly and said that Linux barely works. All of that is provably false. Here is one of many examples of Windows having profound issues…

https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/licensing.html

Now,

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynami...

> For the purpose of complying with the LGPL (any extant version: v2, v2.1 or v3):

> If you statically link against an LGPLed library, you _must_ also provide your application in _an object_ (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.

Basically not a single software developer is going to go through these hoops to link with LGPL statically. I don't care about theory crafting. Linux has been there for over 30 years now. Show me the applications that comply with that. I dare you.

Actually I know a single example (!) and that's proprietary NVIDIA drivers. Not an application BTW. You cannot imagine how difficult Linux kernel developers have made life for NVIDIA. Yeah, there's a huge object file to be linked with the kernel. Other examples? None. In Windows you compile a driver and have it work flawlessly for at least a decade.

Sorry, I'm done with you. You're now baselessly and shamelessly accusing me of lying where a simple Google search reveals everything I say is true.

Windows requires none of this crap. What's funny is that Win32 is the only stable Linux API. Not even glibc provides it. What's even more funnier is that DirectX is still a far more richer set of APIs than what Linux provides despite Open Source making it as hard as possible to link to it. And basically no one does.

With most laptops and pre-assembled PCs Windows comes for "free" (included in the cost). If you're a builder, you can get a Windows license for a low as $10 and live happily ever after and use your old applications including I don't know Adobe Photoshop CS2 released ... almost 20 years ago. Still works fine in Windows 11.

Merry Christmas.

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

#403

Post by ryao » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:12 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #397

ryao wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article. It did correctly say that Linux is not an OS and that the distribution is the OS. Then it said Linux is an OS. The article author and you are the ones spreading FUD here. Much of what the two of you say is factually incorrect.

Linux is not an OS and that's an indisputable fact. An OS must have: * Stable API/ABIs including for the kernel * Wide software compatibility * Decent QA/QC * Can be used with any hardware it's meant to support Linux on desktop has none of that. E.g. the open source AMD driver, amdgpu, has a gazillion of regressions and issues for any kernel: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues If it works for you, that's…

None of that fits the definition of an OS. As per Wikipedia, “An operating system (OS) is system software that manages computer hardware and software resources, and provides common services for computer programs.”:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

The reason Linux is not an operating system is because it is just the kernel and you need more than a kernel to fit that definition.

The only thing you said that is correct is that amdgpu has issues. Everything else you just wrote is wrong.

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

#404

Post by feelamee » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:14 PM UTC

orev wrote: post #250

JonChesterfield wrote: post #97

The Windows desktop is unusable shite, not the Linux one. OSX also fine. My Linux desktop machine does not crash. It runs whatever I ask of it boringly reliably. So does a laptop. That's been my experience for twenty years now. My shiny new Windows 11 work laptop locks up about twice a day. Reboots if I hold power for long enough to start running again. Gives me no indication what is going wrong. Doesn't even give a…

Windows definitely has its problems, but hundreds of millions of people use it daily without these kinds of issues. You’re doing something very, very wrong if that’s truthfully your daily experience.

> You’re doing something very, very wrong

hahha, really fun taking into account quote from article:

> You're using the wrong Linux distribution

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

#405

Post by ryao » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:16 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #391

ryao wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use the other system’s elf interpreter (which is conveniently a library). Then it should work. Saying an ability to run older binaries does not exist is just wrong. By the way, when someone makes an assertion that something is always true, it only takes 1 counter example to disprove it. The assertion that you cannot run old Linux binaries on a newer system has been disproven by a counter example.

> Saying an ability to run older binaries does not exist is just wrong. For 99.99% of users this "ability" does not exist. End of story. Period. I don't care about hacks on tops of tricks on top of hacks. People are not interested in this madness. Every second comment in this discussion comes from a hardcore software developer who desperately tries to vindicate core Linux flaws by providing workarounds which would wo…

Then you acknowledge your previous claims about the capability not existing were wrong. You also contradict yourself by saying elsewhere that mostly geeks run Linux, which implies far more than 99.99% of users can do this. It is not a hack either. It is the way you are supposed to run old software by design.

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

#406

Post by ryao » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:22 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #398

ryao wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would not call limping along from extreme levels of telemetry, AV and other bloat “works great”. Discussing “driver failures that break the system” is a strawman since bad drivers never really broke the system. They just crashed it such that it needed a reboot. That said, Microsoft lets garbage that has no business being in the kernel into the NT kernel, which resulted in this fiasco that actually broke Windows sys…

> I would not call limping along from extreme levels of telemetry, AV and other bloat “works great” 2 billion users don't notice too much "limping" and "telemetry". 1. This entire post is whataboutism, the article is about Linux 2. NSA/CIA/FBI and pretty much all governments of the world use Windows that is ostensibly riddled with spyware and telemetry 3. In the past 20 years not a single person with WireShark and MI…

  > Parroting BS on the Internet doesn't make your post any more valid.
  > That's disgusting coming from an "IT specialist". You have issues with basic logic.

I assume you are projecting here since I have never once in my life described myself as an “IT specialist”. This fits what you have been doing far better than it fits me.

It leaked a while ago that Microsoft Windows automatically uploads WiFi passwords to their servers, which are sensitive information. This was after the WiFi sense debacle.

As for not noticing limping, of course they would not notice it when they have never seen the machines run faster. Install a Linux distribution on the machine and they will be amazed by the speed. It happens every single time I do it.

I am not sure what you think the your TLA and governments remark achieves. It just seems to be the ravings of someone spreading FUD to me.

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

#407

Post by ryao » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:23 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #259

devops99 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The content is total garbage, which is where the problem ultimately lies.

The garbage is a result of me using Linux for almost 30 years and also being an active Linux maintainer. I can vouch for every word in the article except maybe the last section but this discussion alone speaks for itself, so even that part is not totally wrong. Here in this discussion we've got all the falsehoods that I've heard a billion times already: * It works for me it must work for everyone else (never mind oth…

What do you maintain? If it is on my system, I want to get it off my system as I have zero confidence in your competency after seeing all of the FUD you are spreading.

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

#408

Post by LooseMarmoset » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:24 PM UTC

Klonoar wrote: post #327

LooseMarmoset wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Steam Deck literally has a desktop mode, and you can connect a keyboard, mouse, and monitor to it, and play games that way. Both my son and I play games using this method. The Steam dock was designed to allow users to take advantage of this mode, among other things. You can install regular Linux applications in Desktop mode, including Libreoffice and Firefox. It's probably fair to say the majority of users don't…

Even if we grant that point - which I'm not willing to do, since: > It's probably fair to say the majority of users don't do this You still missed the part where I noted: > These are specific scenarios with specific hardware optimized for each use case. Desktop Linux encompasses the sheer amount of available PCs and laptops that one might install it on, and there is a miles long list of “just about everything works e…

Everything you're describing here is literally true of Windows.

How many desktop PCs aren't certified to run Windows 11? Can you hack it and make it run with esoteric commands and dubious registry edits? Sure, but then you're in the same spot Linux users are.

How much hardware do people throw away because manufacturers don't write updated drivers anymore? Right, you're back in the just about everything works but situation again, except in Windows.

The only real difference between Linux and Windows is that new hardware is better-supported in Windows, and comes with a shelf life, and older hardware is better-supported in Linux with a shelf life that Microsoft can't touch.

When you add in and then Windows includes telemetry and data mining that Microsoft won't allow you to turn off and won't tell you what is included I can't see why anyone would want Windows.

> These are specific scenarios with specific hardware optimized for each use case. Desktop Linux encompasses the sheer amount of available PCs and laptops that one might install it on, and there is a miles long list of “just about everything works except $x thing” articles.

> This is and has been the thorn in Desktop Linux's side for the last ~20 years.

The Steam Deck literally does not have these problems. It's the the Linux Desktop, perfected!

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

#409

Post by ryao » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:26 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #402

ryao wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does one make hundreds of contributions to a number of important projects yet be so woefully ignorant about things as you are? In this discussion, you have claimed that Qt is under the GPL, said that running old software on Linux systems is impossible, claimed Windows runs near perfectly and said that Linux barely works. All of that is provably false. Here is one of many examples of Windows having profound issues…

https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/licensing.html Now, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynami... > For the purpose of complying with the LGPL (any extant version: v2, v2.1 or v3): > If you statically link against an LGPLed library, you _must_ also provide your application in _an object_ (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application. Basi…

LGPL != GPL

You just provided evidence that your remarks were wrong and then claimed it validated your remarks as being right. Rather than accuse you of lying, I would accuse you of having a severe issue in your basic reasoning skills.

Furthermore, your rant is consistent with disorganized thinking, which is often a symptom of schizophrenia. I suggest seeing a psychiatrist.

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

#410

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 31, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

itvision wrote: post #394

ryao wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, LD_LIBRARY_PATH works well (or has for me). If for some reason the elf interpreter is unable to use the older libc, just use the old elf interpreter. Second, do static linking to achieve what you want. Then it will run on the older Ubuntu trivially. That of course requires updating the application when a vulnerability is found in a library, but this is no different from Windows where you have to update many ap…

For 99.99999% average people out there none of this utter cryptic crap works even remotely which basically means it doesn't exist. Can you stop with anecdotal evidence? I don't care that you can make old software works. I can do as well, you know. Been there long before you even knew Linux existed. Had a nice little trip with GCC 2.96 by RedHat if you even remember that fiasco of epic proportions.

[deleted]