Where would it be "better"?
It added a lot of complexity, along with its own new failures.
> The ability to control audio volumes per application, and the viewer which
> shows all input and output is really really good.
That is like cherry picking one thing and ignore the rest.
How about the systems where pulseaudio does not work, the daemon
not starting and can not be started? The increasing complexity in
keeping your system up to date - which systemd also pushed onto
people.
So, no - your comment is factually wrong.
> I think a lot of the technical arguments about systemd are really just because Pottering is an
> asshat and poisoned the well early on.
This was never my problem. Poettering may be an asshat or not, I have no idea. What I do know
is that he has been wrong numerous times and still isn't learning from his past mistakes. But
this is also not the interesting part.
Systemd itself is also not interesting.
The, to me, MUCH more interesting part is how distributions adopted systemd without asking
the users. Now THAT is true asshattery. Understandable that Red Hat is doing so because
it's a shitty greedy corporation, but that debian (!) went to betray its users - now THAT is
really the most interesting part of it all.
The Arch situation is no issue, ever since jud left, arch died. VoidLinux is the new Arch there.
> Debian are mostly correct about it, it's basically a good idea
Huh? How, why and where is it a "good idea"?
You have not given any argument, as is typical for pro-systemd posters.
> The real problem is that the developers are dismissive and don't always take
> good advice on board. Maybe that's partly because of all the hostility and
> every minor issue being turned into a huge drama,
This is not a "minor issue".
The fact that you have so many people oppose systemd speaks for itself.
You also have distributions that specifically do NOT use systemd.
So, a totally disruptive technology - and you call it a "minor issue"? That
shows that you are blind.
Yeah.
It is unfortunate that Linux MINT went the systemd route.
You can look at their blogs how they praise systemd.
Of course they never gave specific examples as to how this makes:
a) their life easier
and, more importantly
b) the life of users easier
The usual "argument" is "we use it because all distributions use it". And, honestly - that is not a good argument at all.
I don't see how your comment has more weight - to me it evidently has less weight due to it not containing anything relevant to what the poster you replied to wrote.
The fact that you need to call someone else a "troll" shows that you are still at kindergarten level.
Please try to leave the kindergarten and man up.
Yeah, very true.
It is interesting that so many people loved KDE3 even though it had warts.
KDE4 inflated these warts and let them explode with CANDY EFFECTS - and once the candy dust settled down, nobody was left there to pick up the remains.
This is so true.
The fat corporations have been stealing the Linux landscape.
Systemd is a wonderful example. Who pays these trolls? Red Hat, the new M$.
One of the few last strongholds is the linux kernel - if you get the criticism from people like Poettering, they are on their way to replace Linus with a conformist.
Slashdot Mirror
Where would it be "better"? It added a lot of complexity, along with its own new failures. > The ability to control audio volumes per application, and the viewer which > shows all input and output is really really good. That is like cherry picking one thing and ignore the rest. How about the systems where pulseaudio does not work, the daemon not starting and can not be started? The increasing complexity in keeping your system up to date - which systemd also pushed onto people. So, no - your comment is factually wrong.
> I think a lot of the technical arguments about systemd are really just because Pottering is an > asshat and poisoned the well early on. This was never my problem. Poettering may be an asshat or not, I have no idea. What I do know is that he has been wrong numerous times and still isn't learning from his past mistakes. But this is also not the interesting part. Systemd itself is also not interesting. The, to me, MUCH more interesting part is how distributions adopted systemd without asking the users. Now THAT is true asshattery. Understandable that Red Hat is doing so because it's a shitty greedy corporation, but that debian (!) went to betray its users - now THAT is really the most interesting part of it all. The Arch situation is no issue, ever since jud left, arch died. VoidLinux is the new Arch there. > Debian are mostly correct about it, it's basically a good idea Huh? How, why and where is it a "good idea"? You have not given any argument, as is typical for pro-systemd posters. > The real problem is that the developers are dismissive and don't always take > good advice on board. Maybe that's partly because of all the hostility and > every minor issue being turned into a huge drama, This is not a "minor issue". The fact that you have so many people oppose systemd speaks for itself. You also have distributions that specifically do NOT use systemd. So, a totally disruptive technology - and you call it a "minor issue"? That shows that you are blind.
Yeah. It is unfortunate that Linux MINT went the systemd route. You can look at their blogs how they praise systemd. Of course they never gave specific examples as to how this makes: a) their life easier and, more importantly b) the life of users easier The usual "argument" is "we use it because all distributions use it". And, honestly - that is not a good argument at all.
I don't see how your comment has more weight - to me it evidently has less weight due to it not containing anything relevant to what the poster you replied to wrote. The fact that you need to call someone else a "troll" shows that you are still at kindergarten level. Please try to leave the kindergarten and man up.
You haven't explained anything Zero Kelvin - please try again to prove that what you claim is accurate.
No it is a good article, better than your comment here too.
Yeah, very true. It is interesting that so many people loved KDE3 even though it had warts. KDE4 inflated these warts and let them explode with CANDY EFFECTS - and once the candy dust settled down, nobody was left there to pick up the remains.
This is so true. The fat corporations have been stealing the Linux landscape. Systemd is a wonderful example. Who pays these trolls? Red Hat, the new M$. One of the few last strongholds is the linux kernel - if you get the criticism from people like Poettering, they are on their way to replace Linus with a conformist.