4chan

Ranter

HampusMa

3290

Comments

7

ihatecomputers

4496

5y

I dunno... It's no walk in the park... I'd recommend if I knew the hardware is compatible but that fact alone is enough to disqualify it from "average home users". Man, I spent fucking days trying to get a stable internet connection and I grew up with these computer things and write code for a living. Fuck wasting time. Fuck not having a stable internet connection. Fuck having to spend hours getting your Bluetooth headphones to work. I like [gnu/] Linux [based OS'], but not that much... That lean un-bloated feeling is bliss but the rest of it could easily give me an aneurysm. Let's not talk about that piece of shit m$ office "alternative" Libre office... I understand why you guys use LaTeX for everything when the alternative is that rotting corpse of an excuse for software.

Thanks for letting me vent. I haven't booted into Ubuntu/elementaryOS for months but the rage is still there.
3

ihatecomputers

4496

5y

I'm also a bit jealous that I don't "get it". Like, it's a mystery in so many ways to me. It's interesting. Some day I might stop being a noob learn this stuff for real... It's just frustrating when you need to get stuff done and don't have the time to RTFM so that you can compile Arch from source while bowing respectfully before your poster of Richard Stallman.
4

Fast-Nop

39378

5y

Desktop Linux just sucks, and no it isn't replacing Windows, get real man. Server Linux is because you pay pros to deal with it. Embedded Linux sucks also, but it doesn't cost royalties and you pay devs to put up with that clusterfuck. Android? Google invested billions into hiding Linux away, and there's not much left over from any Linux experience, which is how it could be successful with end users in the first place.
2

IntrusionCM

14956

5y

In my experience there will never be a true Linux Desktop OS.

Android is really messed up example

Reason it has great support by vendors is due to the fact that there is no kernel upgrade possible.

Reason why Linaro / AOSP have the "longer longterm" kernels.

Linux would need to give up one of it's major design principles in order to become a true desktop OS - having a stable API / ABI so vendors can just dump their fuckpile of drivers like in Windows - which will never happen.

Yes, you will have to check hardware compatibility always.

I still have trouble with my Ryzen 2400 G and regular call traces in dmesg. Bug is known since > 1 year plus, even announced to mailing list, no reaction.

MS Office is necessary - for work in my case - and no virtualisation please. It's painful (qemu) or buggy (virtualbox).

Xorg vs Wayland, Python 2.7 packages, Flatpak vs Snap... Many more examples...

I love linux - but I'm aware of the compromises it has due to it's design principles....
4

dmonkey

2327

5y

There one fundamental true in his speech: Linux IS already complicate to the "common joe" because it's not preinstalled on any machine. This makes it impossible to use for common joe.
3

HampusMa

3290

5y

@jurion

"Well, you base your « assertions » on Windows 98 or something ?"

No. Windows 10

"The only valid point I can see in your rant is data collection/”spyware”. You do know this is completely optional and can be deactivated ?"

No it cant. All you can do is to decrease the amount of surveilence you get.

"Through my life I tries to make full switch to Linux at least 2 times. The longest I didn’t need to spent 1 hours configuring something was about a month.
\“Hey Awesome, you have a new WiFi card ! Let me recompile kernel for adding the support for this chipset. Oups your GRUB is fucked your data is lost\”."

Yes, if you have a feature disabled you have to recompile your kernel to enable it but most chipsets should already be supported atleast in big name distros.

And if you somehow manage to fuck up Grub, thats your fault.
You cant loose your data if you fuck up Grub. Its a boot manager.
4

Fast-Nop

39378

5y

@FrodoSwaggins I've had Linux already in the 90s, but it sucked more than even Win95. And not because I couldn't deal with Unix - I was routinely using HP-UX at that time anyway, plus AIX and Irix. And then Linux from 2001 to 2010 as only OS, bypassing XP and Vista.

Vista sucked also, and that was THE chance for desktop Linux, but they blew it harder than a hoe who'd happily suck a golf ball through a garden hose just for the next shot. Which is why I'm now on Win7.

And yeah, I totally understand why desktop Linux isn't a thing and will never be. Even with Win10. I may ditch Win10 in favour of Linux, but not because Linux is good, only because Win10 sucks so hard AND I'm able to put up with the Linux shitfest if necessary, which most aren't.

Ooohhh and the reboot.. you know what? I'm shutting down the PC at the end of the day anyway. No matter which OS. Did that even with Linux because I just don't get a boner from 2 million years uptime.
2

HampusMa

3290

5y

1. I meant in the sense of knowing what Linux is. Most Android users probably dont even know what Linux is and that Android is based on it.
Linux being used a lot doesnt mean its mainstream. If Linux was mainstream i would assure you more people would talk about

2. I agree. But if he wants to use gui configuration tools thats up to him. I just told him that there exists gui configuration tools for gnu/Linux.

3. Exactly. Windows does have its own significant flaws. Its just that most normies just dont notice them.

4.
4

Fast-Nop

39378

5y

@FrodoSwaggins 1. Windows doesn't just die unless your HW is broken. It can even restart AMD graphics driver shit these days. Get real.

2. Won't go into the history, just look back how the Linux desktop failed despite Vista being presented to them on a silver plate, especially with the netbook boom back then.

3. Because Linux in the 90s just sucked. HW support, stability, distros, everything was a joke. Win95 crashed frequently, but unlike Linux, it was at least useful between the crashes.
2

Wijen

13

5y

most non tech people don't even know Linux.
And because usually they use Windows already, they will be lazy to change and afraid if their data lost.
What average joe needed is availability like preinstalled OS on new laptop, they don't give a fck for spyware
4

AlgoRythm

50854

5y

With these sorts of things it's easy to forget how computer illiterate most people even are. The average user won't be able to install ANY OS other than the one that came on their computer and when that hard drive fucks up, they just buy a new computer. You will never get an an average user to write an image to a bootable device, boot to it, and then go through the installer (which even the simplest installers have scary concepts and words like "Erase all data on drive!")

Then, once you filter out all the people who can't even install Linux, you get all the people who install it and just never find a use for it. They're back to Windows in a week. Happened to my buddy and I don't even blame him.

I agree with the article. While Linux has the potential, the reality is that it's difficult to see it on my mom's laptop.
1

Hazarth

9476

5y

@irene well tbh, its only mainstream on servers because of its history, however OP is making the point that thats no longer the case. Distros are now packed with environments that don't make it all that different from Windows visually, and it works out or the box these days. At least with user friendly distros, but thats the point: There are user friendly client distributions now. People are just still regurgitating all the stuff about Linux that were said 20 years ago and unlike op, I think thats normal.

Most people dont like making radical first steps without a hell of a good reason, and thats why linux struggles compared to windows, on which most users are raised. But with Windows going down the drain lately I think more young users will start looking for an alternative, not to mention its free to try.

However, is it just me, or is anyone else afraid of linux being destroyed if it goes mainstream?
3

mksana

248

5y

"Yes, Linux isn't mainstream but by the increasing number of people getting to know about Linux it eventually will be mainstream."

This part of the op made me chuckle.

In my first job, about 20 years ago, I had a colleague who occasionally wore a t-shirt which said "Unix is the operation system of the future. It has been for 20 years."

Now, *nix is the OS of the future for almost half a century already. :D
1

Hazarth

9476

5y

@irene well I can't speak for all of them, but both Mint and Kubuntu come out of the box configured very similar to windows. Application bar at the bottom, clock and keyboard layout on the right bottom, menu on the left bottom corner, applications in that menu listed with a search feature, and the shutdown button is right there too. Icons on the desktop even with a recycle bin icon, pretty slick and stylish, a process manager GUI app pre-installed, firefox pre-installed... Word editor... Music player... Drivers work... Installation had a simple wizard to follow and identifies best settings...

It was an extremely smooth and familiar transition for me and that's what I mean. You dont even need to touch the terminal if you dont want to. All the printers connect fine, pdf viewers are there... It was actually a better experience for me than getting windows up to speed
1

cst1992

2116

5y

I can personally attest to gitk and git-gui having less than 50% of the features of terminal-based git. It's necessary to dumb down the GUI for the average joe. What the guy is saying is simply not feasible.
2

galena

7172

5y

@ihatecomputers I can only agree on libre office! Looks like its the one from Ms but out of an era where xp was the latest and greatest. Where you have to hover/click more than 70 diffrent buttons only to find where to change the margin of somethin'.
1

synchronicity

1312

5y

@Haxk20 Ikr, I also installed it on my first try without any problem. No idea why people still struggles while installing Arch.
0

Fast-Nop

39378

5y

@irene the reason why that shit won't change is because there's no money on the table. With servers, you pay the "Linux margin" on the server hardware so that the vendors like Intel or ARM can employ devs to make sure shit runs on their hardware.

There's no money flow at all from desktop users, which is why it's a hobby show and there's no incentive for change. Users can't vote with money, but get routinely ignored and ridiculed instead.

Windows fucks up? Haha Windows sucks. Linux fucks up? Haha the user sucks. Only that this won't make anything better.
0

Fast-Nop

39378

5y

@FrodoSwaggins It gets even better. Win7 takes WAY less maintenance than Linux for desktop. No reinstall in 9 years.

With Linux, frequently because there's no LTS. And if LTS, then outdated applications because everything is bundled with the stupid package manager which even Torvalds said it's crap for application deployment.

Well or rolling release in eternal beta stadium and no testing and frequent breakage.
0

Fast-Nop

39378

5y

@irene Win10 has the unfortunate combo of forced updates on the one hand, and MS cutting down on test and QA on the other. That's not acceptable.

With Linux and all the shit, at least once I got things working AND I don't change anything, then it keeps working. Sounds like trivial, but Win10 is deliberately failing this very basic OS test.
0

HampusMa

3290

5y

@jurion My Arch Linux laptop have always booted after ive updated it's kernel. And if it doesn’t boot, all you have to do is to boot a live usb, mount your boot/efi partition and fix it (it's most oftenly grub-mkconfig)

Related Rants

Add Comment

rant

linux

sucking linux's dick