Slashdot Mirror
Worst Linux Annoyances?
greenrd writes "Ever spent hours trying (and failing) to get a printer driver to work on Linux? Struggled to configure something ever-so-slightly out-of-the-ordinary? What have been your biggest annoyances when using Linux? Three O'Reilly authors are compiling a book on Linux annoyances - and their suggested solutions - and they've started a mailing list here. I can't help but think, though, that such a book will be dated quite quickly. Sure, some problems do languish unfixed for years - but equally, I suspect many of the problems will be fixed before, or soon after, the book's publication date. Still, increased visibility might motivate developers to create fixes or workarounds for some of the problems, so maybe this is an ideal opportunity to get your pet peeve finally addressed!"
Isn't something from the OS itself, but the "1337" attitude from the users. "Use a different distro!", "RTFM!", "l4m3r!"
I gave up on Linux (and went back to BeOS) simply because the attitude of the Linux users I ran across was intollerable. You won't find that with BeOS users.
(And I'm willing to bet money this gets modded as flamebait, but it's the painful truth)
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
My top five annoyances with Linux right now are CUPS, CUPS, CUPS, CUPS, and CUPS.
Its features are variously undocumented or vastly overdocumented to the point of utter incomprehensibility. It configuration is totally frickin' opaque. And every day or so it just stops printing anything until I restart both the printer and the server (but only in that order!).
I am baffled that anyone prefers CUPS to the old reliable lpd. It's a nightmarish beast that nearly makes me consider going back to Windows.
--G
Seriously, if Windows just went away, all my Linux problems would be solved. Here are some annoyances:
I can't get support from my cable company because most of their customers use Windows.
I can't use some web sites, especially for streaming media, because most of their customers use Windows.
My boss worries about using OpenOffice.org because it may not be compatible with MS Office.
I have to pay more for a laptop because it has Windows preinstalled or the OEM pays MS even if it doesn't.
Then there's the availablity of apps or clients or drivers, compatibility with Windows networks, Winmodems, kids' games.
Geez, it's so bad, someone should think about looking into whether any other OS could even fairly compete! Oh, wait, there's another annoyance:
I have to worry about Linux being made illegal in one way or another, because Gates has bought up all the politicians!
Damn Windows!
"You can't get something for nothing." - my grandfather, on the stock market and Reaganomics.
Sure, let someone override this behaviour if they give the special flag after RTFM, I propose --literal. I am tempted to implement this using a bunch of perl wrappers.
I hate to say it, but you're problem is that you RTFM but not all the way.
rpm doesn't require a -p option. If you're installing, just use:
rpm -i packname.rpm
If you're uninstalling use:
rpm -e packname.rpm
Hell, in Nautilus (the program meant for folks that won't RTFM), you can just double-click on the darn things.
Try burn:/// in Nautilus and that should take care of your cd-burner whining.
file-roller will take care of your tar problems too plus give you a nice little GUI.
These all come by default with RH9.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
I'd quibble with the idea that macs enjoy good hardware support. They generally don't, but because nobody tries installing MacOS on 5 year old machines they found in the closet "just to try it out" it doesn't have to jump through the hoops that Linux is expected to.
I guess what I find annoying isn't the Linux kernel, per se, but rather the maze of infrastructure around it. DON'T Hate me. I love Linux, but confession is cleansing and most of these are things Linux inherited from *NIX/SystemV and the fact that it was put together over a period of decades by thousands of contibutors, so there wasn't a history of system management to learn from yet when it was initially designed.
I also may be overdue for my meds. (Ahem...)
TWO desktop environments with similar capabilities.
Distros that put things in weird places.
The fact that distros have the freedom to put things in weird places.
The fact that 'weird places' means that there are a half-dozen places for binaries to go (/bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin/, etc...)
Don't even bring up /opt!
"User-friendly" management tools with a learning curve that is almost as steep as that for the service or feature they are managing.
The same goes for script-based management systems.
The fact that these tools are necessary so I can cope with the management idiosynchosies and conventions of two dudes in Argentina that have been sysadmins of a UNIX server farm for 16 years.
The SH/BASH scripting language. (!!!!)
Configuration files based on archaic paradigms like the SH/BASH scripting language.
Software that uses configuration files that served as an experiment in parsing for somebody's undergrad senior project. (Therefore, it has a unique, confusing syntax with zero readability and requires one of them there "management tools" I mentioned earlier.... I'M TALKING TO YOU, SENDMAIL!!!!)
I'm sure I can think up more, but that'll get the discussion started.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
Why is the port syntax in ssh "-p NN" and in scp "-P NN"? I'd be less pissed off if the two programs weren't a) based on each other and b) from the same tarball.
*sigh*
In addition to this the host of lameness in GNOME, for example, the lack of ability to paste text after you've closed the application it's been copied from. They are talking about taking over the desktop and this doesn't work yet? WTF!!!
Other things in my list (mostly gnome):
- no easy menu editing (ie: drag to where you want it)
- nautilus views are neat but you loose the functionality to be able to select of rename files in say, the audio (media) view
- mime type editing sucks. make it easier
Why can't GUIs and command-line commands be at least somewhat targeted to the users who generally know what they're doing but aren't programmers and can't remember all of the command line options for hundreds of programs?
Let me make sure I understand your complaint: Gnome is too easy/featureless. Most CLI commands are too hard/feature-filled.
You want to make the easy things harder and the hard things easier.
You basically want Linux to target the "Middle 50%" of users that Microsoft writes their software for.
This will make Linux better?
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"