Slashdot Mirror
Linux Needs More Haters
Corrupt brings us a ZDNet column by Jeremy Allison, who says Linux could benefit from more "tough love" in order to improve its functionality and popularity. Excerpting:
"As Elie Wiesel said, 'the opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference.' LinuxHater really doesn't hate Linux, despite the name. No one takes that much time to point out flaws in a product that they completely loathe and despise. The complaints are really cries of frustration with a system that just doesn't quite do what is desired (albeit well disguised). A friend pointed out to me that the best way to parse LinuxHaters blog is to treat it as a series of bug reports. A perl script could probably parse out the useful information from them and log them as technical bug reports to the projects LinuxHater is writing about. Deep down, I believe LinuxHater really loves Linux, and wants it to succeed."
Slashdotters must all be MS shareholders and Vista early adopters!
Well i use Mandriva linux for 10 years now and i love it. I would love that the rest of the world would be as lovely and cooperative as the linux community that's for sure.
...but has to use it for some reason. If I were him, with all this 'let's listen to our haters' strategy, I would start suggesting "improvements" that would kill linux once and forever.
You can help a project without "fixing code." One way is by taking the support load off the hardcore devs. When you do that, for some amazing reason your bug reports also take on a greater weight. Just bitching doesn't do much.
Not every user is going to be a developer, that's why developers need to listen to the critics, because the critics don't have a developer's hat.
THAT is one of the things that makes OSS great.
They could take off the critic's hat and -fix- the things that they complain about.
I mean, isn't that one of the things that makes OSS great?
Yeah, and the other great thing about OSS is that it's as easy to fix kernel bugs as it is to point them out! Yay, you see, anyone can be a kernel developer!
You just got troll'd!
I "hate Linux", to the extent that I use it as little and as infrequently as possible. I certainly don't like it enough to want to spend time, that I could otherwise spend on real life, telling people why I don't like it!
I hate Linux ...OK, you got me, I'm just kidding.
RTFA. "He or she is extremely knowledgeable and able to go into the details of every problem, sometimes as far as analyzing the underlying code and pointing out the problems"
Not everybody has the coding skills needed to fix problems with Linux, Gnome, KDE or whatever program is giving them trouble. Of those who do, most of them have jobs that take up most of their time, and such things as eating, sleeping, and other personal maintenance tasks take up most of their Copious Free Time. Even if they did try to fix a bug, it would take them a long time -- weeks at least, if not months -- to familiarize themselves sufficiently with the code to do any good. Complaining publicly about the bugs, preferably in a forum that the developers follow, is probably the most effective use of their time. YMMV, but if so, how many times have you dug into the source code of a FOSS program you're not involved in developing and patched a bug?
Good, inexpensive web hosting
They could spent 9 months learning the code, the build instructions, how it all fits together, creating their patch, testing their patch, submitting the patch, then hoping and praying that the project accepts the patch--
Or they could put in a bug report than the project maintainer can fix in 5 minutes, since he's already done all that work.
Which one sounds more efficient?
Of course, the real problem is that (most) open source projects don't read their bug trackers, even if the public is putting in bugs. I estimate around 75% of the time the bug never even gets assigned. This is after expressly asking users to submit bugs when they encounter them. I've given up, and I'm sure I'm not alone on this.
Comment of the year
For a person who spends his time getting first posts on Slashdot, they might as well be.
I hate printers.
LinuxHater's blog is aweseome, and I say this as someone who deeply loves Linux and GNU and all that is based on them. His criticisms are very well thought-out, not just stupid name calling, but clear, effective, technical, and explicit complaints about everything that is wrong with free software. He coats it with sardonic and bitter vitriol, yet beneath that tough exterior, there are the complaints of someone who has evidently spent a lot of time poking around the system, down to its gritty internals, and has found everything that could be improved about it.
Even Miguel de Icaza loves LinuxHater's blog. I recommend that any free software enthusiast spend some good time reading the blog. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll wonder how you can make it all better.
People who make up problems to write malicious articles will probably write equally malicious code and give bogus advice. Let's not forget how M$ sold the Lotus team development tools that M$ developers hated and ignored. Given the size of the free software community, this kind of malice will never be a serious problem but all code needs to be carefully evaluated.
Not necessarily. Often you know what went wrong, but you don't know why the execution path actually gets there. That's where you need the developer.
The only thing wrong with linux is lack of availability of 3rd party shrink-wrap type applications and games. I would love to give up XP, but linux can't run the video editing software that I need and games that I want.
You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
One of the reasons I like Linux so much is that there's so little to complain about. Everything just works. Occasionally there's a driver hunt or compatibility issue, getting a scanner to work, but overall, once it's set up and working, smooth sailing.
That was the way Windows used to be. Everything would install and just work, while the Linux tinkerers spent hours chasing down compatibility issues and combing through HCL's. But Vista changed that perception and the very time Linux was making progress in big leaps.
Five years ago if you wanted a smooth install and minimal fuss you picked Windows 2000 or XP. Now you install Ubuntu or buy a Mac. The reality is probably a little more complex but the perception certainly has changed.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Use the app from this previous article to scan a few popular Linux-hating blogs' articles and comments and maybe you've got yourself a pro-active user feedback tool. Maybe.
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
I think he's right about LinuxHater and right that we should be thankful for that kind of criticism. Pointing out flaws in a more public manner and in a way that makes it accessible to a larger audience can help shape opinion and get the flaws fixed.
Sure, LinuxHater could try to fix the bugs himself but I think that would be a lot less effective than what he's doing right now.
Even with all the warts, OS X is what Linux wants to be - and is stumbling miserably in many ways. As long as developers only work on what interests them, Linux will be hindered. Few coders really want to roll up their sleeves and do the dirty work of writing 4,000 printer drivers, GUI front ends to countless mundane command line functions or software ordinary people want to use in daily life. That's what Apple pays themselves to do.
You can know how to eat without knowing how to cook.
It's silly to expect people to take time to learn how to cook before complaining that the Linux stew lacks something.
But it's fair to ignore complainers who just say "it's bad" without giving anything useful.
I know lots of smart developers who have tried Linux and ported apps to it, just to expand their knowledge of the operating system and learn how to port stuff and to keep their skills up-to-date. But most of them fallback to Windows. The more pragmatic ones switch to OS X because it is just like a Unix OS, but with far greater usability.
At one point I kept a blog of all the troubles I had with using Linux. Most of the items were really simple things that made it very difficult to use. But often even constructive comments were met with disdain, so I gave up. No sense in complaining to a deaf audience.
This all comes back to the zealous Linux pragmatism where truly constructive criticism is turned into that with-us-or-against-us mentality.
grandparent was sarcastic, I think
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/x-windows/disaster.html
-Don
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
I don't read that blog, but in general people complain about things that are not really broken, even more I would stop liking Linux as much as I do if it were "fixed" according to their complains.
Frankly I don't know what is to complain about Linux, except for not running Windows programs (if Wine can't handle them) but that's not a complaint about Linux per se, it's a reality external to Linux and no Linux or free software developer can fix that in a easy way, they don't do it because they are lazy or they don't want to fix it, it's just hard work and Wine people are doing an amazing work.
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
OS X is the 'tough love' that Linux needs. I use Linux on the server (although I have a rack of Xserves too) and there's a reason I am happy with it there (unlike OS X).
On the desktop? Well I use a Mac. And I don't think I will ever go back (in the interests of fairness this is being posted from my 'Games and things' XP laptop).
I love the fact Linux is dynamic, and open source. I really do. I don't like the fact that it doesn't seem to 'evolve'. The fragementation of WM's, distro's etc. never actually seems to weed things out. What we never end up with is a 'de facto' solution.
People argue that choice is good. I'm sure it is. But the reason that Windows and OS X still beat Linux on the desktop experience is because they are standardised - there just aren't alternatives. And OS X is a better 'desktop Unix', so as a person who wants that, where else am I meant to go? If nothing else KDE 4 would drive me away... yuck.
I did use Linux on the desktop. For several years. I only tried OS X on a whim.
I don't hate Linux, but I don't think I'm alone. Go to a confernce these days (I'm an academic) and I used to see people booting into myriad versions of Linux as they opened their laptops. These people are now in a minority, as the Apple logo is raised in unison at the beginning of any talk.
Fanboy? Maybe.
I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
I read the article and I thought, "Well, that sounds like a good idea." Too often when anyone mentions ANY of GNU/Linux's shortcomings (which, to be fair, are far less in number than Windows's), they are labelled a troll and are either attacked or ignored.
So what happens? The comments for this story include gems like "Not that much to complain about" and "Linux + GPL what is there not to love."
Legitimately easy-to-use GNU/Linux distributions such as Ubuntu didn't happen because of the GNU/Linux Yes-Men out there. It happened because the people at Canonical listened to complaints from people like GNU/Linux haters and tried to address the issues.
Or for that matter, flip the situation around. It seems that many users on Slashdot love GNU/Linux and hate Windows. If someone wrote an article saying that Microsoft should listen to the issues of Windows haters to help improve their product, wouldn't you think it was a good idea?
it just chooses its friends wisely.
I mean there are always alternatives, you could even use MacOS. (not windows though)
I do have a bit of an issue with some developments. Some supposedly user friendly Linux installations /etc. To control the config file control process you have to edit certain configuration files in a hard to find location.
think they should also be fool proof. Like certain NAS solutions, or maybe even Ubuntu which I'm using right now. There really are machine generated and machine controlled config files in
People, this is counterintuitive! Call me old fashioned but if I change a config file in /etc I mean it. I don't need some clippy like demon thingy to tell me that I can only edit its own configuration. It should be able to read the darn /etc file if it is that smart. If /etc isn't expressive enough invent something else and don't leave old stuff around.
There you go, got your two minutes of hate now?
Je me souviens.
Most bug trackers are smart enough to send e-mail to a developer, or a list of developers.
I think 99% of all submitted bugs are read (or at least glanced at), however the bug trackers are often way behind and (gasp) sometimes those e-mails are just ignored or forgotten.
Sometimes its as simple as a language barrier, sometimes just very busy people .. or sometimes you happen upon a developer who is 300x more sick of the program than you are :)
Fixing things isn't nearly as fun as calling an operating system and all of its users a bunch of gay lords.
The only people how can affect the quality of Linux is the distro makers: by including or excluding packages. However, those who feel snubbed can just go and produce their own distro. While that is their right, it doesn't help weed-out the software that is either poorly written, badly designed or is similar to something else (how many CD-burners does one operating system need?). You find that software is propagated by those with time, rathe rthan talent.
If there was some way to inject commercial realities into the linux work - not necessarily by charging/profiting, I feel the quality of the end product would rise, due to the competition and differentiation that would come about. Though how you do this, I have no idea.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
No one takes that much time to point out flaws in a product that they completely loathe and despise.
:P
Then I guess all the Windows bashers are secret Vista users, including myself
Monstar L
Not everybody has the coding skills needed to fix problems with Linux, Gnome, KDE or whatever program is giving them trouble. Of those who do, most of them have jobs that take up most of their time, and such things as eating, sleeping, and other personal maintenance tasks take up most of their Copious Free Time. Even if they did try to fix a bug, it would take them a long time -- weeks at least, if not months -- to familiarize themselves sufficiently with the code to do any good. Complaining publicly about the bugs, preferably in a forum that the developers follow, is probably the most effective use of their time. YMMV, but if so, how many times have you dug into the source code of a FOSS program you're not involved in developing and patched a bug?
A few times, actually; I've done it with d4x, pan pidgin, the first because of the way that it was handling URLs from rapidshare incorrectly, the second because I didn't like some of the default interface behaviors, and the third because I wanted a better way to manage the logs.
Granted, we're not talking about a kernel here, but its one of the great things about open source.
Many of the problems reported by the Linux Hater are cultural; if you submit a patch the maintainer will just reject it with -ENOTABUG.
There are far, far less unique drivers needed than there are printers. In many cases, several models from the same line will actually use the same driver, but you have to list all of them because the average user won't have any way of knowing they're all the same. For that matter, there may well be cases where one companies printers simply use the same control codes as another, better known brand. As an example, years ago I had a dot matrix printer from Star Micronix. Even though it was a minor brand, I never had driver issues because I knew (having taken the time to RTFM) that it was Epson compatible and that the standard Epson driver was all I needed.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Linux lovers should be grateful that anyone bothers to provide free criticism. Commercial vendors spend big bucks on focus sessions to acquire the same information.
One troubling trait exhibited by some Linux devotees is their insistence on responding to any criticism of the software by touting it's free software/open source roots. Frankly, that's little consolation to someone who's pointing out why they're unhappy with the software. Why should the model used to develop and distribute software mollify users when they see inadequacies in that software?
Of course, linked to that is the really annoying challenge to "Just fix it yourself! You've got the source!" That's an absurd claim. It's either premised on a wish to rid the Linux community of anyone who is not a bona fide developer, or it is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to be a competent developer.
Linux is a great OS and the best desktop distributions have nothing to hide. But, nothing ever gets better when people deliberately turn a blind eye to complaints.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
that nobody (outside MS) has that kind of skill wrt windows, at all. And that complaining rarely helps, if ever.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I'm not sure about the months, weeks or even days. Sometimes it can be hours, sometimes even minutes, it all depends on a bug.
My bug report work flow:
1 - Make sure I'm not the bug
2 - Grab the source
3 - Browse
4 - Figure out (approximately) what point in the code my bug is coming from
5 - Write a bug report like this:
Hi,
Your program foo just killed my cat. No shit, killer pokes aren't funny dammit and you said this would work on a commodore PET! My cat had a seizure and its dead claws are now embedded in my skull as I write this.
As far as I can tell, its fate was sealed somewhere around line 2113. Looking at your commit logs, it looks like someone got ahold of the user "hsimpson"'s password, please ask him to change it.
I would help diagnose this more, but I have to get this cat off my head.
See? Even if I know _nothing_ about the code, I do know _something_ about the bug .. and can usually provide a little bit of information beyond 'its fucked up, fix it' .. which is the gist of the common bug report. :)
If Jeremy is correct, then the author of Linux Haters has chosen what is possibly the least likely route to garnering interest from Linux developers. Which linux developer would consciously choose to read a blog that refers to them as a 'luser' incessantly from paragraph to paragraph.
The 'benchmark' OS he seems to use as the basis of the bulk of his criticisms is OSX, an OS I find really frustrating to use (and I use it fairly often these days). If I were to start an OSX Haters on this basis should I expect the Aqua and XCode authors to read it daily in the interests of improving all the braindead things about both those aspects of OSX? Didn't think so.. Maybe the guy just has a crippling case of Internet Rabies induced by deep boredom and Jeremy's simply being a little generous..
There are, afterall, blogs featuring meticulously prepared images of meals that people hated eating. Perhaps this blog is simply in the same vein; just another masochist whiling away the hours in public.
Must be a slow news day.
This "Linux haters" thing is not even wrong. There haven't been any kernel bugs in Linux worth mentioning for at least since version 2 came out. Watch what Linus Torvalds says, there's no plan for version 3 yet. No need.
What makes Windows and OSX more popular than Linux is the same reason why Java is more popular than Python or Ruby, it's corporate sponsorship. With enough marketing, people will pay more for an inferior product, just compare the Asus eeePC Windows version with the Linux version to see what I mean.
This is important to learn in life. When you reject someone that loves you, then they hate you. As long as they hate you, they still love you.
Once they don't care any more then it's over.
It discovered this all on my own when going through a bad breakup so that part of the comment particularly leapt out from the page to me.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
They could take off the critic's hat and -fix- the things that they complain about.
I mean, isn't that one of the things that makes OSS great?
And there is the fundamental problem with Linux -- the "geeks only" attitude of so many of its proponents. The lawyer who wants an office system, the granny who has just heard that they can video-conference with their grandchild halfway around the world, the schoolkid who wants to get their geography assignment done -- most potential Linux users will never have anything to contribute to Linux except advocacy, and as long as any requests for help are met with "fix it yourself" suggestions or a pile of technical gibberish (heck, I am a coder, and I struggle to understand most of the supposed support on offer) then they will stay with other systems whose developers do understand the needs of the non-technical user. That way they'll never be more than potential users, and Linux won't even get their advocacy.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Some of the LinuxHater criticisms are valid, but the biggest ones I see (from a 20 minute reading, mind you) are extremely difficult to address. Lack of hardware drivers (especially for laptops and wireless networking) is still a problem for many people. It just doesn't work to tell the average user to buy Linux supported hardware; if they can't at least try it with what they already own we've lost. OTOH, often this is due to the hardware manufacturers' unwillingness to open the specs. The other biggie I see is overwhelming choice of GUI vs one that Just Works for everything. Again, this is hard because we don't have a boss dictating which DE should be "finished" first, rather we have a lack of consensus from many teams working independently of each other constantly reinventing the wheel.
Don't get me wrong, I still use Linux quite a bit and have a lot of love for it. In fact, I tend to think that if everyone used Linux it would start to rally suck, because then we'd see tons of crappy, 3rd party binary blobs doing god-knows-what and preinstalled crapware from the big PC vendors, just as one can see on practically any windows machine.
So maybe we should ask ourselves, "do we actually want to dominate the desktop market?", rather than "how can we dominate it?".
Caveat Utilitor
Lately it's become popular for Linux users and devs to profess their love and devotion for the Linux Hater. But I don't think they really get it. The author just propagates the same old "grandma can't use it" and "too much choice" and "developers should focus instead on XYZ" crap that you found on usenet years ago.
The message is not simply, "Linux needs to improve," but rather "Linux will never be good enough."
Most experienced Linux users probably have it in them to respond to inane trolls with precision and objectivity, but when a troll with a sense of humor, good writing skills, and some domain experience comes along, everybody cowers and plays along. Hey, the popular guy is here, everybody play cool.
Too many Linux users are caught between their love for straightforwardness and cutting-edge technology on the one hand and their lust for popularity and respect on the other. Linux Hater is not here to make you laugh. He's not secretly using Linux and enjoying it. He's the guy who sold you out for cooler friends in tenth grade, idiots.
There are far, far less unique drivers needed than there are printers
Sure, a generic driver will run a lot of printers - but it's the options that kill you. PPD files are supposed to take care of that but there are still scads of unique printers (and scanners, and All In One devices) that make this a daunting task. You're right about users, though - they'll see buttons that say "double sided" or "staple" or "tabloid" or "tray 3" and wonder why all that irrelevant stuff shows up for their $49 inkjet. That's what Apple has taken care of. It just works. Linux could get there too if only SOMEONE would organize the efforts of contributors.
Seriously? You must be new here.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
You need to learn rethpect for wymen, becauthe mytheth are more than jutht boobth, you inthenthitive clod!
Unfortunately that's one thing a lot of Linux advocates fail to get: Not everyone has the ability to alter the code to "fix" things.
This is especially important for the types of Linux advocates that are pushing for "Linux on the Desktop" and other non-specialized applications. You are trying to push Linux onto people who can barely turn a computer on without electrocuting themselves - do not expect them to "scratch their own itch."
What we need are fewer self-righteous asshats who can actually put themselves in the position of a novice and try to understand their needs - or at least listen to them without condescending retorts. Windows, for all it's shortcomings, tailors specifically to novice users (ie the vast majority of computer users) and that's why it's so popular. Cry monopoly all you want but until you fix your usability issues you are not going to make much progress.
=Smidge=
Complaining about problems with Linux and Criticizing Linux, and hating Linux are two different things.
I critisize Linux all the time. I'm very tough and very disciplined even with open source projects. (and yes, many of them could use some lower case D discipline.)
Hating Linux is what happens when you post lies about Linux. Which many people do.
Embrace, extend, then extinguish?
Population is necessary to avoid extinction. You have to have a large population or your species goes extinct. People who say "Linux should only have one interface." are also saying "People should only be white, with blonde hair and blue eyes."
Linux has plenty of haters... like up in Redmond, and up in every Microsoft shop that feels threatened by Linux.
Seriously, though: there is no point in "hating Linux": Linux is a large collection of independently developed and maintained components. When some people hated Qt, they developed Gtk+. When some people hated Perl, the developed Ruby. When some people hated Sawfish, they developed Metacity. Etc.
That's different from Microsoft: I can hate it as much as I want to, I just can't fix it.
All distros must REQUIRE a graphic sudo dialogue system (a-la osx) in order to distribute a file manager.
File managers are there to manage files, and not just on your own user space. There is nothing more annoying than having to drop to shell level and type furiously to do something which on mac can be done with a few drags and drops.
Most people don't even know how to do that, and all they see is "operation not permitted".
Think about that for a minute... Because there is no option to authenticate (out of the box), joe user is put through the same scenario with his files that you get put through when some company surprises you with a DRM scheme.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
... coming from an aura of wussness.
To paraphrase James Baldwin: I love Linux more than any other operating system in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.
Thats completely false. Not bringing third party development has nothing to do with willingness to spend money. I bought the boxed Quake 4 for Linux.
What the corporate developers are afraid of is casting their software before wolves instead of sheep like Windows users. Linux users are disobedient. They like to tinker. Windows users are blindly obedient. They don't want to risk a beating.
Better yet, they could take off the smart-ass hat (or ass-hat) and make some criticisms that are actually valid.
After reading TFA I figured the blog would at least be a bit amusing and perhaps a bit insightful.
Instead it comes off like someone who has just been spent a 12-week exchange program in France and now fancies himself an expert not just on France but on Europe.
There's nothing insightful here, nothing useful, and nothing even really funny except for an almost comical misunderstanding of basic ideas.
What on earth makes this guy think he needs to update his kernel every time there is a minor revision or a new rc? What on earth makes him think that he needs NFS on a desktop? What on earth makes him think that NFS is either difficult to set up with the gui tools included in most distros or that it's somehow unstable?
What on earth makes him think that the latest, bleeding betas of applications are automatically better for him than the stable versions already packaged?
Have a look at the blog if you must, but there really isn't much there that makes any sense. I mean the kid seems to be implying that because Vista can do defragmenting on a schedule it is somehow better than a filesystem that doesn't get fragmented in the first place.
Don't feed him, and don't worry about him. One of these days he'll grow up.
I count myself in the group of developers that used Linux for a few years, then switched back to Windows.
I had and have one PC at home. To run Linux, I set that machine up dual or triple boot. I was running Red Hat for a while until they changed it into Fedora. I worked with Fedora for a while, but they had a bug with dual booting that they would not only not fix, but called it a feature. I got as far as the version of Fedora that had SELinux in it. Someone told me "Debian is better." I had that as a partition for a while. But I like trying out new software development frameworks and that made for incompatible library versions and apt-get didn't help. I mostly kept with the Fedora, fought the SELinux configuration and got it under control. Then the one PC died.
At this point, I had spent huge amounts of time fiddling with Linux and faced more basic problems, like knowing how much money I had in my checking account.
So I went out and got another PC with Windows pre-installed. It came with Quicken, which I already knew how to use. Later, when I really got into digital photography and purchased Adobe Photoshop Elements. It not only seemed more intuitive then GIMP, it also allows you to organize your photos within the program. When I started shooting RAW mode with my DSLR, it handles that quite nicely too. I also got an iPod and started listening to more music than I had in years.
Since I was no longer trying to keep running Linux, it was not a problem.
This is despite the fact that I have spent 25 years developing software and have many years of Unix experience. I might have thought all that time spent becoming familiar would help me at work. Maybe it did a little. My employer had one contract that I worked on which familiarity with Linux played a role. But otherwise, my employer has about 70 employees, no IT department, and as far as I know, no one else who knows Linux. If I were successful in introducing anything there that ran under Linux, guess who would be supporting it? They have me doing this other job that would not go away while the Linux training and support ramped up.
In my regular job, I select hardware to install as part of integrated systems. I may deal with 20 or 30 such devices while traveling to the customer job sites. All of them either have web configuration or require you to install a support program under Windows. If I were to adopt the stance that I would only run Linux on my work laptop and reject equipment that did not support Linux, we would not be able to complete our jobs and would have a hard time explaining to the customer why we could not complete the job. Actually, I would just get fired and they would hire someone who doesn't have a problem running Windows on their work laptop.
So I run a mix of closed and open source applications on Windows and am happier since I gave up depending on Linux. I have all that free time now to pursue other things. If I want to run Linux, I can boot a Knoppix CD. But I don't really do that very much anymore.
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
Igor! Just the man I was looking. I have fallen badly from a /. comment and now I need some stitching on the left leg. Seem to be missing a patch of skin off my arm too.
Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
1. Vision. You can't have a bunch of haphazard crap floating around in a bunch of different distros and expect it to be adopted by people who have to have accountability.
2. Marketing. Nobody is going to purchase anything when their is no value associated with it. Linux has no value on the desktop simply because their is nobody to blame when "shits all fucked up". You can't point to MS Tech Support and say "We are waiting on our trouble ticket to be resolved". As much as any C?O HATES to hear those words, they also know that they are the words that ensure they don't get "kicked off the team".
3. Drop the fanboishness. Nobody in an enterprise is going to choose a desktop flavor because some pimplefaced geek says it's better than MS. Lets see, who has an actual track record here? And (this is a biggie for enterprises, especially public ones) Let's see, do we place blame on a corporation who we can sue, or do we place blame on the pimple faced geek that talked me into Red Hat, and has now moved on to another job?
Yeah, that's a big one, the actual ability to place and lay blame. Don't give me the Red Hat crap. Yeah, they provide technical support. They also provide no guarantee that anything will work for anyone. You get that with MS, even if it doesn't mean much.
What Linux needs is marketing, vision and a leader.... And by a leader I mean someone who wasn't just out to say "I can do this, and you can't stop me".
Yeah, this will be an unpopular opinion here. Oh well, truth sometimes hurts.
--Toll_Free
Maybe the problem was that your mom's kidney drivers was packaged as DEB files. She should of just brought the source code so that the tech could compile the driver.
Windows is as solid as quicksand.
It's true that bitching can get you far. But it doesn't guarantee results.
Making a good bug report is more work, but has better chances of working.
Paying to have the thing fixed might be the most effective, and it's encouraged in lots of projects.
The for-profit model has a built in advantage in that once the people controlling a project decide making a change is a priority they can FORCE the people on the team to do it. OSS is exactly the opposite; if nobody feels like fixing a bug it doesn't get done, or it takes more time. There are strengths and weaknesses to both systems.
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
Bribe them.
That might work.
Bitch and moan critics who don't contribute code (or money) are in bountiful supply for all software, not just OSS.
Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
I'll give fair crits.
Let me say first and foremost, that I prefer booting into Ubuntu and using that as my daily driver. Sometimes I just can't though.
Here is a list of short reasons why:
Skype seems to be faster, and work better in w32. My video gets sent at higher resolution, and I can hear the other party better. Dunno why, this is just the case.
7zip is screwed up in Linux. I installed a wine version, AND a native version, only the wine version will start and it flickers and won't let me select a package to extract. Making it unusable.
Random crashes. I mean, probably as many or more as I get regularly in Windows, with the added inconvenience of ctrl+alt+bckspce not being near as good as ctrl+alt+delete, which brings up a handy task menu for me to clean up (usually).
No two sound things going at once. Sometimes I like to put on mp3s, and THEN go kill people in Urban Terror. This is easy and works perfect in W32, but not in Ubuntu, I just get the mp3s, and NO sound in a game whilst they are playing.
TVtime not recognizing my TV card. Dscaler turns on perfectly in Windows. So does TVtime in Ubuntu, but then the screen is blue and there is no menu for me to figure out what is wrong, either.
Joost. Works in windows, not in Ubuntu. I'm sure partially Joost's fault, but still sad.
Civilization 2. Best/funnest version of the game, will not play in wine even though it's like 10 years old.
I like how Windows arranges it's GUI, start button, quicklaunch, then task list, then systray and clock. Less real estate, all the same functionality, but without a top AND bottom bar.
Zsnes. Does not work in any way shape or form, or under wine.
What Linux gets RIGHT however is it's ability to find and install 99% of my hardware without me hunting for hours for drivers, inclusion of most of the software I prefer (firefox, gimp, pidgin, open office, cd burner), Compiz Fusion (blows every Windows attempt away!), and it's open source nature. There is something good knowing the code to my machine is inspected by lots of eyes, not just one corporation, and it's also good to know that if I was knowledgeable enough, some of those eyes could be mine.
Honestly Linux feels "closer" than it ever did. It just needs to solve a few naggling issues before it can fully dominate the world by desktop. Another way it could do so is by being AHEAD of the curve. It would be nice if there was a superior FOSS Skype killer, since skype is actually deficient in numerous ways, including not being FOSS. Speex is a better speech compression algorithm, so it would seem like we have the tools in hand to beat the current corporate paradigm too, and yet it sadly isn't happening.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
I say he doesn't like or dislike linux. He just likes fucking with dogmatic linux users.
They could take off the critic's hat and -fix- the things that they complain about.
Right, because being able to identify deficiencies in operation magically turn you into a competent and experienced coder.
One of the things the Linux nerd crowd is going to have to accept before Linux can become seriously mainstream is than not all Linux users are coders anymore.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Wasn't there a story a few month back about a guy, a normal guy, some French medic IIRC, that wrote drivers for a few hundred, or thousand, who's counting, webcams? He just wanted to get his webcam to work but ended up writing a framework and churning out driver after after driver. Try doing this on OS X (all webcams come with Windows drivers, so no one has to write them of course).
Oh, what is K3B but a front end to a bunch of commad line tools?
Cheers
Look, that's why there's rules, understand? So that you think before you break 'em. (Terry Pratchett)
(Explanation: many many internet cafe customers at least from my experience here in Athens Greece really want a videophone appliance, and access to some social networking sites - they don't care about the OS. Even more to the point they've learnt just enough by *rote* to talk to their kids - even resizing windows or copying files phases them. Anything other than a clone of the whatever windows messenger is a no no for them).
Observationally it breaks down like this:
Egyptians - mostly yahoo msgr, 6arab.com
Moroccans,Tunisians - mostly windows live
Filipino - yahoo messenger, friendster.
Bulgarians - skype, mIRC
oh , and even if you get past the messenger level, how about font/language support for my friends who speak amharic, sinhala etc?
Good luck with that
Incidentally, one of the driving factors in upgrading Vista to XP (at least in my experience) is that many new first time users are *already* using XP in an internet cafe. (A quick comment here to enlighten the more abstracted slashdotters - the change in Yahoo Messenger 9 moving the webcam button from the toolbar phases about 60-80% of users the first time).
Andy
My old junker 700MHz Linux box fell to the 'linux curse' where hardware started failing left & right, thus making the OS fail. It happens on every 2ndhand system I install Linux on. So I get a refurbished computer & reinstall linux. Spent over an hour getting the resolutioon BACK to 1024x768 on a Micron monitor. Nothing, NOTHING should ever take that long just to change the desktop resolution. Ubuntu's "desktop resolution" is like a showcase of resolutions you honestly dont want(640x480)
Tbe rest of my time was spent trying to get my account to authenticate in Samba. I have never been so frustrated with one app than Samba. It's just one authentication problem after another.
gFTP - okay, it kinda works except if you want to delete a large directory. I mean seriously, how difficult is it to solve this bug? And if you (YES YOU!) had coded it, wouldn't you be embarrassed at such a silly bug?
:D
XSane - does it's job I guess, so I'll not be tooooo mean to this. But it is perhaps the ugliest GUI app ever! But hey, don't worry because Gnome scan will be ready soon. Any day now. I can feel it!
Actually, I could quite get into this being unnecessarily horrible to FOSS!
"once its set up and working, smooth sailing" The problem with linux is getting it set up in the first place! I do a lot of work with audio, and spent many years being very productive with OSX. Now that I've switched to linux though, everything's a mish-mash of drivers, config files, codecs, emulation layers, and background processes. I like the idea of having a modular system, but everything's so distributed there's no one way for all the applications to agree on, for instance some look at ~/asound.rc, some just look at /proc/asound/cards (even utilities developed by the alsa project differ in this), and my popular sound card needs to be called at least five different things by different programs (SBLive!, EMU10K1, CT4780, C1, Live!, etc etc etc). Plus I can't just plug in USB devies and have them "just work" like in OSX, so now I have to have a working knowledge of kernel modules, init scripts, etc. I don't mind learning about these things, hell I'm a CS undergrad, but being sentenced to months of headaches before I can hear a peep out of my computer is not my idea of smooth sailing. If I was a professional, I wouldn't think twice about ditching linux just in terms of how much its cost me in extra time.
The other thing that drives me nuts is the almost complete lack of clear documentation for important stuff like how init works, how modules work and where they live, etc, and alsa is especially notorious for this. I'm all for community support, but it seems like the alsa project just threw up a wiki and said "have fun! We've got more important things do than document our project, which is the foundation of linux audio! ta!" People talk about how stable linux is, but when I'm having to edit sensitive init scripts with only vague forum posts to guide me, as an average user frankly I'm more likely to screw something up, so it's always two steps forwards one step back. And JFGI sucks, I do it all the time and it solves maybe 1% of my problems.
Now I'm sure lots of you are going to say "well that's not a problem with linux, that's a problem with alsa/drivers/3rd party apps/etc" so what if I have any problem with linux that's not specifically a bug in the kernel then the whole operating system is blameless? The problem is the whole platform! Where am I now? After 4 years of linux, sometimes some of my sound apps make sound if they feel like it (and not my favorite one, pd). Open source audio software is of superb quality these days, but if my platform won't let me run it without years of brutal hazing, why should I bother? In my case, because its free and I'm a loser with time on my hands. And gaah now it won't even let me separate paragraphs in my post gaaahhhh!
As far as webcams go these days, if it's not UVC it's not worth buying. And OS X supports UVC webcams out of the box.
Well, I perfectly well understand that developers get busy, and that (some of) the projects are run by volunteers, etc.
My only gripe is that they asked me to contribute to the project by entering bugs. I do so, and nobody even reads them. If nobody has the time to read bugs, don't ask for bugs. Close the bug tracker with an appropriate message. That's all I want.
Comment of the year
(a) VOIP, (b) 7zip, (c) random crashing, (d) sound from multiple internal sources, (e) TV Card, (f) Joost, (g) Civ II, (h) Desktop Layout, (i) ZsNES
(a) I agree that having an Open Source VOIP program that runs wonderfully would be a great addition for Linux. Fortunately, Linux on Mobile Devices is a very strong market right now, so in 2 or 3 years this product will likely become a reality.
(b) You can't open zipfiles? I don't understand this gripe. Maybe you could elaborate on *what* is specifically broken?
(c) I agree! I see a crash when I launch a program (such as Pidgin or Firefox) while the "New updates" notification system message is popped up. It is frustrating and the OS (Ubuntu 7.10) thrashes so badly that I am forced to reboot.
(d) I agree that this would be annoying, but has never been a problem for me so I don't share your pain.
(e) Again, not my cup of tea. It would be good to make it work, but this isn't important for me.
(f) Joost is a product I have never heard of. What does it do? Maybe there is a comparable Linux tool that accomplishes the same thing...
(g) Hell, FreeCiv (the open source version of Civilization) runs like shit on my computer.
(h) I disagree that Windows layout is better. I like having the top and the bottom. The ability to easily switch between different virtual desktops is a big plus that I don't think Windows has figured out yet. And in Windows, I typically have to double the size of the bar at the bottom of the screen to usefully click around from Window to Window in a meaningful way anyway.
(i) Also, not important to me to emulate SNES games.
And my own gripe... I tried downloading HDV video from a Sony HDR-HC3 video camera the other day. I have a Dell Inspiron 6400 with a built in Firewire/1394 interface, so this should have been pretty easy. Ultimately, I had to down-covert it to DV in order for Kino to understand it. I believe Cinelerra is capable of capturing HDV, but it ran so massively slowly that it was not usable.
Also, the install of Kino (through the Applications=>Add/Remove menu) required me to INSERT MY Ubuntu 7.10 DISC!!! This means I had to go searching for that disc. How annoying when the files are easily accessible through the internet.
That being said, I LOVE the ability to have fully functional video editing software for FREE. I certainly don't have the cash to do INVEST in the really expensive stuff (Final Cut and Avid... I am looking at you).
Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
like Linux. But every bug I submit is downgraded to a WONTFIX. Why, because they don't think it is important enough to fix. The same is true of Firefox. I get tired of Firefox locking up on me, but Mozilla always downgrades my bug reports to WONTFIX, even if they are critical bugs that lock up the system. I submit lockup bugs to the Linux team as well, and they become WONTFIX.
Someone needs to look at the WONTFIX bugs and fix them so LinuxHaters won't be haters, but lovers.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
You also have to be willing to work with the developers, sometimes, to help them pin down the bug. As an example, when I moved over to Linux, I chose Pan as my newsreader. I downloaded and installed a sigmonster script, and ported over my large collection of quotes.
Soon, I noticed that Pan was doubling my .sig. Not just putting it in twice, but calling the sigmonster twice because the quote was different. After a little discussion on a mailing list, I submitted a formal bug report. As it happens, I was the fourth to do this and they were all combined. By working back and forth, we were able to pin it down that it only seemed to strike when Pan had to word-wrap a line in the signature, and the static part of mine needed wrapping. A little edit not only cleared up the issue for me, it verified that this was, in fact, what triggered the bug. There hasn't been a patch released, yet, but now the developer knows exactly where to look.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
What those people dont know is that Linux is just windows hacked/rewritten.. Open Office, is Microsoft Office rewritten. Its all Microsoft's stuff, So the Die Hard Linux fans who say Linux is so much more stable then windows, Need to get a clue, after all its just windows with a different written structure. We had to change it a little, so microsoft couldnt come down on us.
"It just works."
I wonder, if I installed OSX on my DEC Alpha, and then tried to plug in a winprinter, would it "just work"?
Yeah, thought so. It never "just works". It only "just works" in your eyes and in the eyes of countless mac fans because Apple bribes the company into writing an OSX driver, and in exchange they get recognition via a small face sticker. From then on out all the little macfreaks will know "Oh, that printer will work with OSX!".
On the other hand, Linux developpers don't have that. They have to write the drivers themselves. They have to find printers themselves, and reverse-engineer them sometimes. And of course plenty of printers are supported.
Just like you wouldn't buy an unsupported printer for your mac and expect it to work, you wouldn't buy an unsupported printer for your linux box and expect it to work. Except, somehow, linux is supposed to magically support everything. Except, you know, nothing supports everything. There are plenty of printers that windows doesn't support but linux does.
"Improving the interface" is something we should do, sure. But tell me something, how much do we need to "improve it"? I don't want to have a single "print" button and then it magically prints. It's not like that in any OS. The current methods are just fine. You click print, you find your printer, and you choose if you want double-sided and what size of paper.
As for GUIs for CLI tools, why? Really, why? There's a reason we have the CLI. The CLI is a direct means of communication with the OS. I tell my computer fetch me this and install it, now. No ifs, ands, or buts. I don't want to open up a GUI tool, wait a minute for it to load, search and wait another minute for THAT to load a single package, and then install it.
And other than package management, really, what would the average user use the command line, that can't be done at all via GUI? Configuring more obscure WMs that don't have a graphical front-end?
My grandparents are not sarcastic! How dare you say that you insensitive clod!
Newsflash: Very few users know how to code - and even fewer know how to design GOOD code.
Don't want Joe users to complain about your programming/design mistakes? Close the source.
This is exactly the "I want it the way it is, fork it and fit it yourself" attitude the Pidgin team seems to have, not to mention the Gimp team, the Blender team, etc. And they keep getting lots of criticism for their UI design philosophy, for not listening to their users, and as many /.ers put it, having their heads stuck up their asses. Should a user have to become a coder just to fix a problem or issue because the devs just don't wanna? That is a half-assed development style, not a professional one. I wouldn't hire any of these people to do my coding; I want someone who sees a project all the way through and listens to what I want.
I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
Linux suffers from the same inherent problem that all open source projects does - every time some one hates it they break away from the community and start their own 'distro'. Its so fragmented and confusing developers can't back a winner and consumers just don't care.
You're right - what consumers care about is that a distro "just works". Then it becomes popular (check out distrowatch), predates more unsuccessful distros and the cycle repeats again.
Evolution at work.
> As Elie Wiesel said, 'the opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference.'
What nonsense.
Someone tell me the rest is worth reading.
Perhaps the other readers' indifference towards your post may give you a clue ;-)
Linux, when I say Linux I mean most mainstream Linux distributions not just the kernel, tends to be missing a lot of small details that would making the OS (for desktop use) useful.
I will use myself as an example.
I started using Linux as my primary OS back in last 1994 with Slackware. Where GUI environments noticeably slowed down PC. I moved from DOS with DesqView for multi-tasking to Linux because its ability to multi-task was just what I wanted running a BBS on my own computer I can run the BBS and do my normal computing at the same time. By the time Windows 95 came out I was very familiar with Linux and Windows 95 seemed like a wimpy version of a real OS. As they got good Multi-tasking and such I was already using Linux to do far more advance things, I had hooked up my old 8086 (yes it was an 8086 not an 8088) computer via Serial connection and had a dumb terminal hooked up so Now I could do more at once. Also because my ISP used Linux as well I was able to do remote X windows connection and did remote X over dialup to test apps that I could download via a telnet to the ISP for fast DL and see if it works the way I want if so then I could DL it... All and all so much more then what 95 could handle with it default settings. Even 98 and NT Linux was technically better. But the GUI interfaces were about a generation (2 to 3 years) behind windows but not in terms of appearance but in terms of configuration via the GUI...
I used Linux as my Primary OS up until around the year 2000, where I decided to move to Solaris on a UltraSparc, as I wanted to work with a Real Unix system and expand my knowledge, with Solaris things were a little tougher as most apps by source were made to be compiled on Linux not Solaris so it required more work to get them to work.
Then 2002 I went with Mac OS X as the PowerBook was the best laptop design I saw at the time. Using Mac OS X I realized what I was missing in Linux and Solaris. Jobs that wern't that tough in Linux and Solaris on the Mac were so much easier that I was actually more productive on a Mac (to my surprise as I was originally expecting to use the OS for a month to see if I liked it then install Linux on it). I have always been using Linux as work but mostly on the server over SSH over all I was happy for it as a server and using my Mac as a desktop.
Recently I got a new Job and standard equipment is a Ubuntu Linux Laptop. Now to say not having used Linux seriously as a Desktop for about 6 years, I wasn't impressed.
First we had Ubentu Hardy Herring installed it for the most part worked however the Wireless card wouldn't work with WPA2 connection (other connection worked fine) So I had to downgrade to 7.10 and Wireless worked. Reinstalling 7.10 on the laptop it wouldn't load the first time I had to use Safe Graphics mode (an other minus) then when I installed it it couldn't figure out the max resolution of the screen (and it will not save it properly and haven't had time to find a fix) So I had an LCD with a low resolution leaving poor graphics, and forcing me every time after logging in have to push it up a notch and save just to have it go back after logging out (Even Windows 95 allowed to save the resolution via the GUI) the Wireless while it works it wouldn't save its settings properly having me to put my keys in to get WPA2 Enterprise to work, every time I move the computer.
When getting my graphics setup I needed to use the NVida drivers it felt political motivated to tell me that you are about to install a NON-FREE driver (GASP!) I didn't care I just wanted it to work and have my terminals semi-transparent and not just show my background image but the window in behind (A feature Mac OS Had for years even before it used the video card to do the transparency), My next question is if Ubuntu is designed to be a Desktop OS then why is it default set to minimal effects, where the middle setting would be more affective.
Next I needed to setup a printer (it asked me for my password to do an Sudu... (the first time before I reinstalled it
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Or that bug report can just get filed with no patch, and nobody looks at it for a few years, until at some point somebody does go fix it completely independently of the report.
Or the reporter did manage to get things to build, make the fix, file the report with a patch, and... still completely no response. Has happened to me (I don't particularly blame them, I know how intractable bugzilla can be).
The only reliable way seems to be to spend months on an appropriate IRC channel, eventually figure out who to poke, and do that. Hardly an useful option.
MS has never brought out an OS that had as many haters as Vista. So according to this logic the next version will be great.
Actually from what I have heard, it might indeed be true.
you had to get the disk because it's registered as a package source in synaptic. just remove it from the list of sources and reload the package list.
Any old-time Unix admin has probably read the "Unix Haters Handbook" a couple of times, and knows that the authors of that book, along with its accompanying usenet group, were Unix lovers deep down. Most of the problems in the original hate book where with sed and awk and sh, tools that at the time were worshipped by their users but have since been supplemented/supperceded by perl and newer shells. I'm sure Linux can use a hatebook just like it's grandpa did at its hayday.
--
And there is the fundamental problem with Linux -- the "geeks only" attitude of so many of its proponents. The lawyer who wants an office system, the granny who has just heard that they can video-conference with their grandchild halfway around the world, the schoolkid who wants to get their geography assignment done -- most potential Linux users will never have anything to contribute to Linux except advocacy, and as long as any requests for help are met with "fix it yourself" suggestions or a pile of technical gibberish (heck, I am a coder, and I struggle to understand most of the supposed support on offer) then they will stay with other systems whose developers do understand the needs of the non-technical user. That way they'll never be more than potential users, and Linux won't even get their advocacy.
And there is the problem with counter-hubris offered up as constructive criticism: it speaks in absolutes and presupposes that things will never change. If you want people to listen to you, you have to do more than just complain without using swears and epithets, you actually have to say something meaningful and non-rhetorical.
You must be talking about this guy, and that's a pretty nice piece of software. And btw, it has been (kinda) ported to OS X, and the result is here.
.sig: No such file or directory
but I don't think anyone ever promised you a goddamn thing.
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Hmmmmm... that brings up an interesting possibility. FOSS with bug-fix bounties. I want a bug fixed, I send $5 to an escrow account, tagged to the bug report. Others who see the bug and also want it fixed can add to the pot. Bug is fixed and confirmed, fixer gets the money.
-- I prefer the term "karma escort."
"If you want people to listen to you, you have to do more than just complain without using swears and epithets, you actually have to say something meaningful and non-rhetorical."
Not when you are a customer. Yes, Linux is F/OSS. But if you want users, then treat them as customers. If you ignore people, lose bug reports, call them stupid, tell them to RTFM, or tell them to fix it themselves, don't be surprised when you lose them.
blah blah blah
Are you an elitist or a fanboy? Mu. You are both.
Ignore your users and they are sure to go away. Then you won't have to worry about those pesky users with their stupid bug reports.
blah blah blah
you see, anyone can be a kernel developer!
Hmm... You just gave me an idea for a movie. RedHatatouille.
I know more than you drink.
On OS X, it's "Spaces" (at least in Leopard). I should probably turn it off or reduce it to 2, as I don't really use virtual desktops anymore. Mistyped ctrl-arrow keys can get annoying after a while, and Spaces by default puts Finder on top, pulling focus away from other applications.
More on topic, having a devil's advocate is good, but if he can't hold a reasoned discussion, he's much more harm than good. Linux Hater is very good at using straw men, red herrings, ad hominem, and non sequitur. Meaning, he's a juvenile trying to argue.
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
It's easy to criticise. How about you try fixing it instead?
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
People just don't know how to use their Linux properly: Don't install apps from source, use the package manager. If an app isn't supported, don't use it. Big hint here: Use Ubuntu Linux. It provides automatic updates.
Didn't Apple give up on writing its own print system for OSX and used CUPS instead?
OK. I've got karma to burn, but seriously, check out this website first before starting to flame or mod me down - at the very least it's got a funny picture on the page :)
http://www.linuxisforbitches.com/
Seems fairly appropriate given the topic at hand...
Gotta get me one of these!
Big hint here: Don't install from source. Use the available packages. If an app isn't available as a package (or with binary install script), don't attempt to install it from source. The same applies to BSD as well, BTW. In BSD, you have two options: Package or Port. I learnt that the hard way by experimenting with various Linux and BSD systems. Now I only use readily available facilities, and don't even bother to try and make something running that possibly can't. If you want Linux the easy way, use Ubuntu Linux. For BSDs, FreeBSD and OpenBSD are good choices. OpenBSD is much simpler than FreeBSD. The BSDs are real UNIX systems in all their unforgiving glory. OpenBSD does exactly what you want. If you destroy it in the process, your problem. ;-)
I found too many things that are just missing the final fit and finish in linux. They are missing "feature completeness." The example that always sticks out in my mind is NFS. V4 is now available in alpha/betaish form, but v2,v3 lacks good kerb support. Apple just put in v2/v3 kerb support... why? They know that someone out there thinks it's important. It's a small group, but it's important. That's necessary... someone needs to d the hard ugly work of cleaning up the old stuff and loving it rather than just moving on to the new cool shiny work...
That goes along with the mantra of Linux, as LinuxHater pointed out: if something doesn't work in Linux, convince yourself you don't need it.
I agree. Much as some Linux distros try to aim at end users, the basic attitude is still an OS by programmers for programmers.
On second thought, I wonder if it's really that, or just the way the vocal Linux fans see it. They seem to do a good job at dissuading people from using Linux.
Just have some poor non-Linux-user read a thread like this, with the multitude of demands to fix bugs herself (or himself), and people saying that changes to make the OS more usable by laypeople are bad. Do you think that after reading this such a user would have any wish to try Linux?
It's obvious from posts here that a lot of Linux fans just don't want non-programmers to use the OS. They seem to be happiest when few people are using Linux, because:
1. The OS is geared for them, and nobody else
2. They can feel fulfilled by bitching about nobody using Linux
Unfortunately for them, it looks like there's a chance of Linux becoming more mainstream thanks to being bundled on devices like the Eee PC.
If an app isn't supported, don't use it. Big hint here: Use Ubuntu Linux. It provides automatic updates.
That's one of the other issues any user coming from Windows or Mac always runs into with Linux: Application X isn't supported or Driver Y hasn't been written yet.
For people such as those here on /. the prospect of making that app work or building a driver from scratch is often an enjoyable challenge. For the rest of the 99% of the world's computer users, it's an instant deal breaker.
Have a look at the list of supported hardware in the CUPS project (Common Unix Printing System).
Frankly, that's exactly why I don't hate linux.
All of my hate allocated towards linux is spent on hating the damned "Fix it yourself!" people.
Linux the OS is ok. The fanboys can all DIA(OS)F.
Not everyone is a developer, I agree. Likewise, not everyone is a graphical artist, musician, documentation writer or translator. A project is not just about the code, there are other areas to work on.
Even if you cannot contribute to any of the above, you can help out in other ways.
You can donate money to a project to help keep it running.
You can help by triaging bugs so that the developers spend their time on the ones that can be fixed (i.e. not the ones that say "foosoft does not work!").
You can test new versions of the software to find any bugs or regressions. This is especially important for core libraries like X11, Gtk, Qt/KDE and Wine. The only way to get the Nouveau driver for NVidia graphics cards to work is by having people willing to test it, report any bugs/data, and work with the handful of developers on the project.
It does not matter how much time and/or money you are willing to contribute. Contribute how much you can doing what you can.
That goes along with the mantra of Linux, as LinuxHater pointed out: if something doesn't work in Linux, convince yourself you don't need it.
Exactly. Or make your own package, which requires skill and expertise. On the plus side, making a package for an app can benefit other people (if submitted to the distro). But it requires some work: First install it into a sandbox directory (using "configure --prefix=dir"), then make a package from it (distro dependent). Nowadays, luckily, there's enough stuff in most package directories even in BSD distros to satisfy almost every need. On BSD I had to recompile packages with optimization turned off, because the GCC version (3.x) they used had a bug-ridden optimizer. But this hardly occurs anymore on Linux, especially Ubuntu Linux, because GCC 4.x has become much better. Of course, you cannot bother ordinary users with such things. But those operating systems are getting better every day. The signs that Asus and AMD are beginning to sell Linux systems might be indicators that the time of Linux is just beginning.
For the rest of the 99% of the world's computer users, it's an instant deal breaker.
Exactly. That's why more software companies need to publish software for Linux. Just a couple of days ago, I purchased a commercial software package for Linux. I think the time of Linux is just beginning. :-)
This reminds me of the Unix Hater's Handbook from the 90's. It's available for download.
I think your comment would have been more valid about four years ago. Ubuntu is so good these days that you basically don't need to get into the "guts" at all. It just works. (Exceptions: power management for laptops, sharing a printer.)
To me, the reason for preferring linux has very little to do with flexibility or capability. The main reason I like it better is that I can run hundreds of applications without paying any money, and without having any of the hassles that come with buying and owning commercial software (drawers full of disks and licenses, being forced to upgrade in order to fix a bug or run the app on a newer OS, inability to try the software without buying it).
Other advantages: I got my kids linux boxes for under $200, which just isn't possible for Windows. I don't have to worry about viruses like I would on Windows. Removing applications completely is easy to do (unlike Windows, where people can't get IE off their machines, or can't find any way to uninstall the AV software they got on a one-month trial, or can't figure out how to deinstall the crapware that came on the machine). I don't have to keep paying $60 every six months or a year for an OS upgrade like Mac users do.
Find free books.
What can I say about that suit that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan? It looks bombed out and depleted. (Playa Hater's Ball)
The for-profit model has a built in advantage in that once the people controlling a project decide making a change is a priority they can FORCE the people on the team to do it. OSS is exactly the opposite; if nobody feels like fixing a bug it doesn't get done, or it takes more time. There are strengths and weaknesses to both systems.
From what I've seen, it's usually as tough or tougher to make a business case happen in a for-profit company than inspiring a developer to make those changes. I'm sure there's exceptions where there's a "mainstream" wish with a business case but no developer who wants to do it, but most are obscure requests that have neither. The different isn't profit/non-profit, it's open/closed source. The downside with OSS is that it's like a huge waiting game - if you can just hang back and use it as it becomes available you don't need to pay, that's only if you need to take the driver's seat and actually pay for support/development. I don't pay for my desktop at home - I know there's many people using Linux in much more critical circumstance which means there'll be patches and hotfixes coming out well within my tolerance anyway. There's much more money in selling the same thing over and over again...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
That goes along with the mantra of Linux, as LinuxHater pointed out: if something doesn't work in Linux, convince yourself you don't need it.
Sounds like Apple's "If the feature dosent exist it isn't worth having"
Any sysadmin worth his salt can tell you that all operating systems suck. Horribly so.
The trick is to find the least sucky OS for the job. Often, this will be a Unix-like operating system like Linu, but that doesn't mean Linux doesn't suck.
Well that's enlightening.
The last time I had a winprinter the same happened to me, actually. It was an HP though, somebody had hacked together a pretty damn good driver to get it working. Don't get me wrong; I never intended to make it sound like "LOL MACS CAN'T PRINT" but rather "What if I throw stupid hardware at it?"...
The point I was trying to make is that NOTHING "Just works". Ever. Sorry, but that's the way the world rolls, and we've all been bitten by it.
That goes along with the mantra of Linux, as LinuxHater pointed out: if something doesn't work in Linux, convince yourself you don't need it.
Sounds like Apple's "If the feature dosent exist it isn't worth having"
I agree. I find Linux zealots and Mac hipsters almost equally annoying.
Not when you are a customer. Yes, Linux is F/OSS. But if you want users, then treat them as customers. If you ignore people, lose bug reports, call them stupid, tell them to RTFM, or tell them to fix it themselves, don't be surprised when you lose them.
This does not run contrary to my statement. Strictly commercial concerns can and often do ignore "[X] sucks because it isn't exactly like [Y]", "I did such-and-such with [X] and it didn't work; therefore, [X] is the most worthless piece of garbage ever", and so on because they aren't useful criticisms, they're just cranky bitching. The people who stand the chance of changing products and/or policy are the ones who make a reasonable, informative complaint rather than throwing a tantrum when they don't get their way immediately.
Don't mistake this for excusing people in the F/OSS community who act like dicks, because they are indeed out there. But if you go in expecting to be greeted with hostility, it's going to be apparent in your tone, and at best you'll get *polite* hostility in return.
FWIW I often find bugs. I'll elaborate. The majority of my Linux use is simply setting up servers and web hosting accounts. Then I do a lot of scripting and work with a lot of people's scripts. When I find bugs I usually dig around and fix them and then I'll drop into the author's forum and/or email them with the changes that I have made and the reasons why I made them. That's with scripts so, well, it isn't all that difficult. With proprietary closed software bugs I actually email them or use their support system and mention that I'm going to do a review of their product on my blog and tell them I discovered a bug and before writing my review I'd like to know if they are aware of the problem and if they have an estimated time to wait for a fix. This has typically worked quite well.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
...that everybody who's knocking Vista loves it so much they want to have it's children?
For those who seek perfection there can be no rest on this side of the grave.
...all the old Linux users who tout things like "Linux doesn't need to do that, it works fine as it is" or "Stop trying to make Linux like Windoze" and other such crap would get a life. Linux needs is to push the envelope and adapt to new ideas. It's for everyone, so if someone is having a problem, they can and should resolve that problem, always, period, and there's always a way to do it with software. What it all comes down to is every user deserves to have Linux do what they want and need, the only question is finding others who agree with you and can help get it created. Linux needs change, so it's sad to see visions being bashed.
I'm anxious for the Linux user base to increase, as it means more new ideas can be introduced, and the percentage of users saying "you can't" will be replaced by those saying "how can we".
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
This, however, is an IT forum, and it's a reasonable expectation that you have the ability to do that. "Code it yourself" isn't actually heard very often on the general support parts of distribution forums.
Put identity in the browser.
Just like you wouldn't buy an unsupported printer for your mac and expect it to work, you wouldn't buy an unsupported printer for your linux
That's not really true these days. With the exception of some Lexmark/Dell printers, everything works with OS X. And from my experience, most hardware and FOS software that works with Mac OS X also works with Linux; the underlying architecture is similar enough so that Linux users can look for Mac-compatible stuff and (usually) be safe.
Yes, lots of open source tools and libraries are used under the hood on OS X. CUPS, Apache, PHP, OpenSSH, Python, Ruby, OpenAL and I think also Samba are all included.
Except that, the times I've read TLHB, he didn't know what he was talking about and made silly, trivial mistakes which just make the whole blog into a giant troll.
... a good troll. He has plenty of people roped into reading his trolls and he's laughing his ass off behind the scenes.
For example, take a look at his Graphics Hating article where he claims NVidia re-writing large parts of X is a great thing, while in reality it's causing huge headaches for people upgrading to newer versions of X. His rant on distributed version control systems boils down to there being too many.
His upgrade Linux rant was full of strawmen, fallacies, and false dichotomies.
He's a troll
Put identity in the browser.
To me, the biggest problem with Linux is a lack of hardware support. There is a little bit, but not until these companies are finished supporting Windows then Mac. Linux does amazing things considering how much reverse engineering has to go into it. If someone started a company (AMD) that made all the requisite hardware devices to work with the Linux kernel "out of the box" both they and Linux would zoom to be the mainly used computing platform.
This is after expressly asking users to submit bugs when they encounter them. I've given up, and I'm sure I'm not alone on this.
I've only ever submitted a few bug reports. My first was actually a report and fix for a pretty minor bug in phpBB. The second was simply a bug report for Miranda IM. The third was a bug report for OpenOffice.org...
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66871
Almost exactly two years ago...
It was assigned and marked as P3 priority ("P3 marks non-trivial problems which probably affect a noticeable number of users. Issues with this priority must be fixed before the target release."). The awesome part is that they never assigned a target release for this bugfix, so the whole P3 classification is utterly meaningless as a motivator.
Honestly, I probably could have fixed this particular bug myself by now.
Anyway, I haven't filed a bug report since. I just don't care. I appreciate and respect that most developers of OSS are doing this in their spare time, but... I just don't care.
I probably wouldn't be as upset with OOo if they at least gave my bug a P4 priority. Leaving it at P3 and not assigning a target release just seems incredibly lazy.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
Much easier to run apt-get install app then to locate download point, download, check for viruses, install, delete useless shortcuts etc. The issue is with many apps once installed, configuring them can be a PITA. Why is IIS easier for a new admin to look after/setup than Apache? the IIS admin mmc snapin. Yast in Suse make this relatively easy, but still not quite as point and click as the IIS interface. There are other "add on" managers, but there should be one provided by default. All the coders love to make the app, then noone wants to write the installer or management tool.
I think it's fine to ignore the people who bitch and moan about the problems with open source software, as long as the open source people don't mind getting ignored when they bitch and moan about everybody using Windows, Microsoft Office, Flash, and Internet Explorer.
This problem of the grizzled old expert using a fresh new Linux distro is a considerable one.
Some of us aren't fully aware of how far away from the CLI the newer distributions
have gotten... even when we are using them ourselves. We're used to old habits
learned a long time ago from before a lot of the current bells & whistles were
created.
We don't bother with a lot of the "shiny and new" stuff because we don't need to.
This can lead us to giving other people a false impression.
If you aren't completely comfortable building from source then it's probably not
a good idea to bother. If something isn't packaged by your distro yet then it's
probably a good sign that it's still a little too raw. It's still a little "too beta".
Free software means that you can see how a project progresses from the very
beginning. You get to see stuff in Linux before you would in other Operating
systems. Not everyone can handle dealing with a project before their is a
proper build. Package managers exist for a reason.
OTOH, anyone can choose to overcomplicate things. Some people excel at this.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
> That goes along with the mantra of Linux, as LinuxHater pointed out: if something doesn't work in Linux, convince yourself you don't need it. ...or it's just not ready for release yet.
Linux means that you can see all of the dirty laundry and the fact that
something is in progress but not quite yet complete. Yeah, it sucks that
something that SOMEONE ELSE is developing in their free time isn't quite
up to your princely standards.
Life isn't always fair that way sometimes.
Yes you might have the burden of waiting until those that are doing
the work are done doing the work. Boo hoo.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I have an open source car. I bought the instructions on how to build it, and I assembled it to the best of my ability. However it does not have some of the common features of mainstream production cars. It has no roof, or airconditioning, no ABS or airbags. However it does have a 500HP V8 in a chassis that weighs less than 1000KG and corners like it it is on rails. That is something that most mainstream cars don't have. I couldn't buy what I wanted, so I built my own. Same with Linux. It does not have all of the nicieties of a propretry commercially supported OS, but I can install anything I want, attempt to build from insttructions stuff that isn't included in the distro. So I think 2008 is the year of the common kit-car, nope, and I hope linux never gets dumbed down so much that it is easy enough for granma to install from scratch (I don't think Windows is either BTW) But if made too simple, there will be no scope for choice.
There aren't enough haters to go around. It appears that Microsoft has monopolized yet another market.
Have gnu, will travel.
I think OSX is gaining a lot of ground because the installation of apps is trivial: drag the thing from the disk-image file to your app folder. Of course its almost as easy in ubuntu, where you select from a pre-defined list. But linux definitely needs a common mechanism. RPMs, apt, and yum simply don't hack it.
Wait. You're saying google for a solution, finding a .dmg from wherever on the intertubes (after paying probably $20+), mounting it as a drive, opening your aps folder, opening the .dmg, dragging the ap file into the aps folder, closing the .dmg, unmounting it and trashing it is easier than opening synaptic, typing in general idea of your problem, ticking a box and clicking 'apply' like you do in Synaptic?
Seriously?
Honestly, installing software was one of my biggest beefs with OS X. You have to mount a file as a drive? And installing software is one of my biggest joys with Ubuntu and its variants--it's one of the few things that's substantially better than the competitors.
OS X's way of installing software is far from trivial--it's about two or three times more involved, and unnecessarily confusing than Linux (or rather, Debian) or Windows.
I'm not making any comments about nonDebian installers--things start to fall apart fast.
Who in this case happens to be Jeremy Allison.
What the Hell are you talking about? Jeremy Allison "endorsed" some modern amateurish criticism (and my whole point is that such an "endorsement" is stupid, be it by Jeremy Allison or anyone else).
I am referring to the Unix Haters Handbook, similar text that was published 14 years ago and since then shown itself to be completely worthless for any purpose other than promoting the use of Windows to ignorant people.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Where do I send my complaints? Seriously I am new to Linux, and it is unbelievably frustrating to learn. Very difficult learning curve, and absurd user interface. I know open source is awesome, but I will take Windows any day over Linux, but I will remain using mac os. For people like me who are computer savvy and understand the reasons for user permissions, but are visual learners, being forced to use the terminal is not fun. Linux will not become mainstream until the terminal is eliminated from 99% of usage. The average user should have the option of using the GUI at all times if needed.
you see, anyone can be a kernel developer! Hmm... You just gave me an idea for a movie. RedHatatouille.
Haha, quite my original thought, except the awesome pun ;)
You just got troll'd!
Debian's repositories and package management always blows me out of the water when I use it, and I always wish windows worked that way.
-The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
You are just really right on. Thanks man. I do think the toughest part about using Linux (for me) has been the rather abrupt and rude veiled threats I seem to get in IRC, or in forums, or elsewhere.
You can come on and say, "Hey, I can't play a DVD!" or some other such stuff, and next thing you know there is some LEET HAXORZ telling you that you need to try and program a DVD decryptor yourself in PERL or you are some kind of retard.
But I'll admit that for experienced computer people, less informed questions from n00bies can be frustrating. I've been on both side of this coin more times than I'd like to count, and I sympathize with some of the Linux nerds. They just need to take a deep breath, slow down, and link to a good FAQ that solves the problem that is usually VERY common, and has been had by about 20 windows converts probably that very day.
Not an easy thing to try to remember to do, what with the pressures of real life, and the annoying tendencies of Windows converts to blindly run into the same walls over and over again.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Or they could put in a bug report than the project maintainer can fix in 5 minutes, since he's already done all that work.
Which one sounds more efficient?
Well the fact there was a news story recently where they've only just fixed a THIRTY YEAR OLD Unix bug, it can't be all that good, can it?
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
Assuming the critics are actually knowledgable and perform substantive criticism. Otherwise developers should save their time an just ignore the constant stream of whining crap that composes most of the blog-o-sphere.
I *enjoy* LinuxHater, but it is primarily entertainment; like a comedian who mocks politicians. It is entertainment, nothing more. I don't agree with what he says anymore than I take what a comedian says about public policy seriously [doing either is would just be stupid].
Using "Common Sense" is being either to arrogant or to ignorant to ask people who know more about something than you.
Complaining publicly about the bugs, preferably in a forum that the developers follow, is probably the most effective use of their time.
It is a waste of their time and usually just irritating. Go add comments to the bug-report rather than wasting your own time blogging on your BLOG no one significant will ever read. Personally, I advocate the old put-up or shut-up approach. Complaining is not constructive, when children do it it is called "whining".
I've fixed lots of bugs; sometimes it is really hard and sometimes it is really easy. I don't expect most end-users to become bug-fixers. I do expect users to report their problems in the correct forum (bug database or project mailing list) and in a constructive way.
Using "Common Sense" is being either to arrogant or to ignorant to ask people who know more about something than you.
"But it's fair to ignore complainers who just say "it's bad" without giving anything useful."
I think you actually just hit on the real problem. It's -never- 'fair' to ignore complainers. File them in the 'complainer' bin, but don't ignore them. If 99% of the email you get is 'your products sucks' without an explanation, it probably sucks so bad that it NEEDS no explanation. The sheer volume of complaints can tell you things in itself.
I've been reading all these comments and I've come to a conclusion: Haters aren't needed. 'Disgruntled customers' are needed. People that 'hate' don't do it rationally. They are 'fanboys' of the opposing team and have very little actual help to give. Instead, we need people who like Linux (or any open source software), but are able to not only see what's wrong, but are strong enough to stand up and say it and take the rocks that will be thrown at them.
Here, let me add mine:
Blender's interface sucks. Nothing about it is intuitive and every single time I use it, I have to look up where things are and what magic keys to push. Having 'object' and 'edit' modes is part of this... I like it in Vim, it sucks in Blender. Why do I have to go into edit mode to unwrap the UV? Why does it sometimes throw me out of edit mode when I think I've done nothing? Why is it so blessed hard to add a texture to a model?
The rocks that will be thrown at me include:
Do something about it yourself
Write your own if you don't like it
Blender's interface is great if you just take time to learn it
And other's I've forgotten already.
I'm sure you've all heard these complaints before, and they were dismissed. So OSS doesn't really need haters or disgruntled customers at all... They're already there and are being ignored.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
They could spent 9 months learning the code, the build instructions, how it all fits together, creating their patch, testing their patch, submitting the patch, then hoping and praying that the project accepts the patch
There are projects that are that bad. Many are not.
Or they could put in a bug report than the project maintainer can fix in 5 minutes, since he's already done all that work.
Of course, the maintainer (assuming there is one, see below) doesn't have hundreds of other "5 minute" fixes.
Which one sounds more efficient?
The user fixing the bug is way more efficient. Then the user can add a new feature, close someone else's bug, etc... and then the Open Source model can actually work.
*OR* the user can contact the developer and offer remediation ($$$) to fix the bug. After all, what did you pay for the software?
Of course, the real problem is that (most) open source projects don't read their bug trackers, even if the public is putting in bugs. I estimate around 75% of the time the bug never even gets assigned.
This is certainly true, at least effectively. But I don't think it is actually because they don't read the bug database. I believe in most cases it is because there is no-one to read the bug database. I'd say that *easily* 75% of Open Source projects simply have no active maintainer. Maybe they have a mail-list minder, but no maintainer. I've tried to take-over maintainership of two small Open Source projects and not even been able to get a response from the current "maintainer" for that.
I've given up, and I'm sure I'm not alone on this.
Your not alone, I've talked to numerous others who share your opinion.
Using "Common Sense" is being either to arrogant or to ignorant to ask people who know more about something than you.
You can know how to eat without knowing how to cook.
It's silly to expect people to take time to learn how to cook before complaining that the Linux stew lacks something.
But it's fair to ignore complainers who just say "it's bad" without giving anything useful.
Ditto!
There is a difference between constructive criticism and whining-on-your-blog. But both fall under the umbrella of "complaining".
Using "Common Sense" is being either to arrogant or to ignorant to ask people who know more about something than you.
After a full day of work plus two hours of grad school classes, what I would love to do is fix the kdevelop bug that lost my last half hour of coding (or insert similar problem.) Sometimes when my car breaks it sits in my garage 2 weeks waiting on me to have time to fix it, I can't imagine how long my computer would have to sit if I had wait to have the time necessary to search for repeatable conditions for the error, trace through someone else's code with which I'm not familiar, and code a fix for it without breaking something else important.
I get the fun of the whole hobby thing. However, don't suggest I use something, and then when it doesn't work just say here is a hammer and screwdriver fix it yourself. Stroke for stroke, I've never had a linux distro be any more stable than a windows box in at least 10 years. Nor have I had a linux distro be easier to secure or maintain in the past 10 years. That is my anecdotal experience.
There are other things you can do as well. Lots of projects need icons and such. Almost all of them need improvement to documentation (the INCLUDED docs, NOT the online stuff. Online-only documentation is a trick pulled on idiots by assholes.) For instance I've packaged qgtkstyle and micropolis for Ubuntu and uploaded them to a PPA (https://launchpad.net/~martin-espinoza/+archive) which effectively fixes two bugs in Ubuntu (the packaging licensing is Ubuntu-compatible, so "they" can pull my packages right into Intrepid if they wish.) There's a ton of jobs which can be done by non-programmers. (To be fair, correcting documentation is a job which requires extensive access to the developers. If they are uncooperative this job is impossible.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yeah, you're not alone. I filed my first bug report with Filezilla a few years ago on how it handles (or, more appropriately, doesn't handle) certain file names. The official response was that I shouldn't be naming my files "improperly" as it causes problems and the bug was closed. This bug still exists in the new version.
What a great way to discourage feedback.
That holds true across the board, with any OS on any platform. Mac users have convinced themselves they don't need games, and Windows users have convinced themselves they don't really need a working security model. Next troll please!
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
I had one like that too, where the developer replied with a useless work-around that doesn't address the bug: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1865630&group_id=95717&atid=612382
It's the year 2008, what excuse is there for not knowing how menus are supposed to work? Seriously, they've only been perfected since, what, 1985.
Comment of the year
Flip that idea around for a minute. "The for-profit model has a built in drawback in that once the people controlling a project decide that making a change is not a priority, you the user are FUCKED."
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
If you have used Linux for any length of time, you will LOVE the Linux Haters blog!!
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/
It's simply hilarious and amazing at the same time!
Fav quotes
1. gnutls
"Hey check it, I got this great idea: I want to clone a useful and carefully developed library(openssl) just so that nobody can tell me how to give the authors credit. Who's with me?"
2. KDE4
"Wow. Choice is great. Except none of these are what I want. What does "Use with care" mean? Why is there no "Use memory efficiently (and just work)" option?"
I've been using Linux since 1996 and I endorse this site wholeheartedly!!!
Awesome!
This isn't the problem. The problem is that Linux doesn't have a unified driver model. Drivers frequently break between minor kernel versions and forget about having a new driver work with an older kernel.
This is a real-world problem. I bought a Linux compatible notebook. I very specifically chose hardware that would work with Linux with the minimum of hassle. When Ubuntu proved to be unusable (the wireless driver never worked with a static IP and one day just stopped working altogether), I put CentOS 5.2 on this computer.
The video card finally worked with CentOS; X, unlike the kernel, is pretty stable about their driver API. The sound card doesn't work. I only got the networking card to work by installing a third-party driver; it's an older driver version and has an issue with crashing if I don't send traffic over the wireless interface; I usually have a process ping the gateway router once a second, which causes the problem to not manifest itself.
I wish the core kernel developers would find something more productive to do with their time than constantly changing the kernel-level API and ABI for drivers, breaking drivers and making it nay-to-impossible to backport drivers for new hardware.
This is one area where Windows clearly kicks Linux's ass: Drivers. Drivers for a given version of Windows are pretty much guaranteed to work for at least five years. This laptop has no problem working in Windows XP, a seven-year-old OS; none of this laptop's hardware works with a circa-1991 era Linux kernel (yes, I tried this), since new drivers don't work with older kernels.
And that, of course, is the forum I was referring to in the first place. I'm glad to see we agree on this.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
This is the strength of open source, we can all fix things in stuff that is not our project, and we do. Examples are everywhere, eg Linus patching the GNOME filebrowser, ...
That's all well and good, but as yu say, you're a programmer. I don't think I've written a line of code in over a decade; how long do you think it would take me to get up to speed again to chase a bug down? How about my sister? To her, source code would be gibberish; she's never coded, never wanted to. If she stumbled on a bug in an OSS program, about all she could do is file a report and hope somebody else fixed it. With a closed-source program, there's no assurance the people who own it even listen to bug reports from home users.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Tell that to Microsoft about the Vista launch.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
See:
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
He goes on to explain (do we know this is a male? I hate to assume) how technically it's a bad thing that Linux gets no viruses: ****You see, a virus needs to make certain assumptions about your platform. Certain libraries existing, with particular ABI's. Certain data being accessible through particular API's. In other words, a common set of core components that are available on every install of your system so that the virus's code can be small and compact and yet infect as many machines as possible. Wait, this sounds familiar. Oh yea, that's right: real software needs that too. Why is there no proprietary software for Linux? because for all practical purposes DEPLOYMENT IS IMPOSSIBLE.**** Here's the link if you want to follow this logic further http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/06/at-least-we-dont-have-any-viruses.html Wait, if prorietary software is impossible, why does proprietary software exist? He's really repeating the old chest nut about how its' not worth a vendor's while to make rpm and deb packages, but he's worked out a rather convoluted way to use it denigrate the no viruses arguement. He's attacking Linux's strength. It's the Karl Rove treatment. And, again, why does proprietary software for Linux exist if Deployment is impossible? Does the word impossible actually mean anything? When I mentioned in the comments that I had installed the same propietary Linux driver on five different distros, I was asked (by one of his fans) "Yes but how intuitive was it? That's what really matters." So "impossible" has nothing to do with possibility, it has to do with intuitveness? I kept pressing on te fact that words mean something. I really thought I was making points. And I must have been right, because my posts have deleted out. He's a charleton, and his adoring dittohead posters are the ultimate whiners. Typically they have tried Linux and failed with it, and they are too dull to accept it as a learning experience and not adult enough to accept responsibility for their own choices. I'm not as knowledgable as some people, but I don't see a lot of genuine insight in these posts. I see over-abstractions, I see endless straw man arguments, and the posters are downright right morbid in their fascist conviction that an OS with a few percentage points of the desktop share is oppressing them. There have been posts comparing Linux (or its users) to Hitler, and to a Rapist. There are creative slurs like "luser" and "Freetard" used exactly as a skinhead might use more traditional slurs like "faggot" and "nigger". If there is any insight in there, I for one don't need it that much. I don't subscribe to the idea of education through cyberbullying.-- blackbelt_jones
Linux means that you can see all of the dirty laundry and the fact that something is in progress but not quite yet complete. Yeah, it sucks that something that SOMEONE ELSE is developing in their free time isn't quite up to your princely standards.
Then tell these nobly martyrs to stop advertising their software as a better alternative to Windows programs. If your software isn't ready to release, don't release it. And if you don't want to hear bug reports then don't freaking ask for them.
When I file a bug report, it usually goes more like this:
Me: When I do THIS, your program crashes in this particularly horrible way, which I describe in thoroughly tiresome detail.
Developer: Does not! You can't even do that, the program doesn't allow it!
Me: Wanna bet? Does so, here's a screenshot of me doing THIS! and here's the memory dump! and here's the corrupted file! and...
Developer: goes off muttering to self, and a week later sheepishly reports that they changed Some Completely Unrelated Component in the last build and that's why THIS suddenly was doing THAT.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I know lots of smart developers who have tried Linux and ported apps to it, just to expand their knowledge of the operating system and learn how to port stuff and to keep their skills up-to-date. But most of them fallback to Windows. The more pragmatic ones switch to OS X because it is just like a Unix OS, but with far greater usability.
At one point I kept a blog of all the troubles I had with using Linux. Most of the items were really simple things that made it very difficult to use. But often even constructive comments were met with disdain, so I gave up. No sense in complaining to a deaf audience.
This all comes back to the zealous Linux pragmatism where truly constructive criticism is turned into that with-us-or-against-us mentality.
You know, if I may offer you some constructive criticism, you really do sound like a dick. I'm not saying that you are a dick, but I can see where those around you may have been confused.
Here's the way it works: criticism of Linux is pretty much tolerated within the Linux community, not from without. In my favorite Linux Forum, I used to rail against Ubuntu, which happens to be what I'm using right now (turns out, I was wrong) People fiercely disagreed with me (turns out, they were right) but my sincerity was never questioned.
Next month it'll be two years since I switched. If I were to sum up my experience with Linux it would be like this: two years of unbelievable frustration, during which I went back to Windows several times, followed by four years and counting of the most fun I've ever had with my pants on, and the most important and empowering educational experience of my life, probably including my college degree. Every day I'm eight years old, and it's Christmas morning.
How do I convey that experience to another person? Is it better than Windows? Hell, yes! Is it for everyone? Hell, no!
I think the Linux community needs less evangelism and more education. Don't try to convert your parents, or anyone else who isn't curious. Go online, find someone who wants to learn and needs help, and help them.
And don't tell people they don't need the command line. Technically, it's true, but Linux without the command line sucks. It looks and feels like a cheap Windows knockoff. If you don't want to use the command line at all, you're not going to break that glass ceiling, so my best advice is don't bother. Migrating is too much of a hassle not to stop before you get to the good stuff.
The 21st Century command line isn't the unforgiving console of the 1980s. It's a versatile desktop tool. You don't have to give up your GUI, and you don't have to do everything that way.
Actually, I've had FAR better luck getting closed-source bugs noticed and fixed, probably because they're more likely to have money motivators (which probably selects for a more professional attitude toward the user's concerns). And as noted, all too often the OSSers reply is "here's the code, fix it yourself." Sure thing, right after I become a programmer -- maybe in my next life.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I'd prefer that than to the Marketing Hype laden windows world view of "It's new and from Microsoft so you must want it". If something doesn't work in Windows let Microsoft convince you to pay for an upgrade. One creates a self dependency for either make it, work around it or live without it, the other just creates dependency.
I just can't be bothered.
If you do want to get your hands dirty for some things, but want other stuff to 'just work' -- try Slackware. It has a very large selection of packages - and I've had the best luck building non-supported applications on that system compared to using others (Redhat, Debian and clones, Mandriva etc).
For everyone else - stick to Ubuntu and the like.
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
I'm incredibly frustrated at work seeing certain individuals try to displace our neglected Solaris environment with Linux. I'm the only sane enough person to ask "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WHY?", and all I get is close-minded Linux feedback loop dribble.
"It's just easier."
What, easier to manage our SAN storage? HA!
Easier to find out what the system is doing? ROFL!
Easier to patch? Wait... WHY? "I only need to reboot when there's a kernel update." ROFLMAO, good luck with that buddy, let me know how that works out on 100+ servers with six months of libraries and other dependancies being swapped out from under the processes using them.
It's not Linux, it's not open source, it's not free software, I don't even feel it's the fault of my coworkers. I think they were sucked in by Linux dogma. Maybe it's just the Linux community that's to blame. Hate is a strong word, but when faced with extreme ignorance it's often the first emotion to appear.
What just really bugs me is all the people claiming Linux is superior to Windows, Solaris, Mac OS X, HPUX, AIX, VMS, Z OS (seriously, start asking Linux users to point out a superior system, or at least weigh in on pros/cons of each and you'll see the problem).
Way to much Linux dogma with little understanding of other systems. Even the "senior" admins I work with can't seem to grasp why an OS might want to enforce a reboot after updates, or not simply overwrite shit.
I do believe Linux makes a wonderful OS for UNIX developers, and those wishing to explore the inner workings of a (desktop) computer, and it should stand out on its own right. This incessant fighting to replace all of X, Y and Z with Linux is really destroying it's credibility; not everyone is as gullible as the young, naive, geeky, Windows user crowd the Linux community tends to feed on.
I really want to agree with you, and just like it for what it is... an honorable community driven effort to develop a free UNIX-like OS. It gets harder and harder to like Linux when it starts getting pushed by people... now it's business, and Linux WILL get some cuts and bruises.