LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Blogs > Void cries or bashing time
User Name
Password

Notices

This blog is devoted to nonconstructive criticism, bashing, and other things that, being neither answers nor questions, are evidently unwelcome anywhere else in Linux Questions.
  1. Old Comment

    This surprised even me

    No problems here.
    Posted 04-22-2011 at 11:14 PM by lupusarcanus lupusarcanus is offline
  2. Old Comment

    This surprised even me

    AGer, I share your hypothesis, though I do believe I somehow ended up on the opposite side of the spectrum by going minimalist (OpenBSD, as default as possible). My theory is that complex graphical software sucks, and I trust my ability to learn how to use simple, reliable, command-line software in complex ways more than I trust complex graphical software's ability to shield me from having to learn. Too many complete failures with complex graphical software, I guess. This much we certainly agree on.

    rich_c, do larger user bases cause user-friendly code? Does user-friendly code cause larger user bases? Is it possible to have compact, efficient, reliable code and millions or billions of users? Or are the two linked together in some freaky synergy?

    My complaint isn't about the size of the user base, rather, it's with the sheer amount of crap code that gets piled higher and higher with even "server edition" linux distros. It's maddening that I have to build LFS to get linux the way I want it anymore.

    Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky...I think I need a nap.
    Posted 04-21-2011 at 05:42 PM by rocket357 rocket357 is offline
  3. Old Comment

    This surprised even me

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rocket357 View Comment
    Why do Linux users obsess over converting the entire world to FOSS?
    I can think of two potentially valid reasons:

    1. Maybe the majority of FOSS users think they ought to share the good thing they're on to, to benefit others who might not be aware of the non proprietary alternatives.

    2. Maybe FOSS users think if they can encourage a larger market share, then more bugs will be reported and fixed. Again, everyone wins!
    Posted 04-21-2011 at 03:32 AM by rich_c rich_c is offline
  4. Old Comment

    This surprised even me

    "Why do Linux users obsess over converting the entire world to FOSS?"

    Yes, it is kind of obsession. I have never discussed that with professionals, so self observation may lead to wrong conclusions, but my current hypothesis is that I am unsatisfied with all modern software so much that it hurts.

    Pro money development has very good reasons to produce junk, possibly with very few exceptions like QNX. How that can be different in the world where people eat, drink, drive junk? I do not see fundamental reasons that prohibit FOSS to be different. So, there is hope. Last hope, that is hard to loose.
    Posted 04-21-2011 at 02:45 AM by AGer AGer is offline
  5. Old Comment

    This surprised even me

    "Are they good enough to convince everybody that FOSS is the way to go?"

    Why do Linux users obsess over converting the entire world to FOSS? Are you happy with Linux? If so, great...forget converting the world. They'll use wtf they think is best (and for some, hand holding from Microsoft is the only choice). If you aren't happy with Linux, change it.

    Not aiming this at you personally, AGer, but it seems odd to me that Linux users are so OCD over "market share" and "convincing the world".
    Posted 04-20-2011 at 02:00 PM by rocket357 rocket357 is offline
  6. Old Comment

    Yet another commented example of why nada

    Let me list the main faults:

    1. Unable to update what can be updated.

    2. Does not understand that if the 404 error is received the Internet connection is OK.

    3. Unable to switch to another mirror. It knows it, BTW.

    4. Does not assume it is silly and imperfect. THE MOST COMMON FOSS GLITCH.

    More on 4. The pro way is: if something may be wrong, provide an override. The Ubuntu way: try to do that which cannot be done.

    With the upgrade, why not highlight problematic packages, show dependencies, and let me decide.

    Next I ran the Janitor. It suggested to remove a bunch of packages that are not used anymore. HOW COME this is possible with automatic package management and updates?

    More so, how come that only 1 of 3 kernel headers packages was selected for removal? Ubuntu feels free to release pure junk?

    You write Ubuntu is already broken. I agree, but it is THE distribution that defines Linux for the masses.

    Now "Refusing to update is better than partially updating and breaking". Correct. But it sounds somewhat like an achievement and I disagree here. Yes, it is common to write crap and iron it until the main use cases are more or less covered. There is a special buzz word for exactly that - tests first development. The problem is that it cannot be the only way to develop, but to do something better one has to sacrifice some freedom, and FOSS is all about freedom. This is why there is either a charismatic leader capable of taking away freedom, or a boss, or a road to failure (like firefox - Firefox - Firefox!! - FIREFOX!!! - Chrome).

    Frankly, when I compare Linux to QNX I am not that sure Linux is a proof of the FOSS superiority as the way to develop software.

    Re: "officially supported by server hardware". Either nonsense, or yet another problem. Hardware is interacting with the kernel and only with the kernel. If Linux cannot provide me with an environment where this thing either works with some kernel or money back, I am not interested. I would better use Windows which can discipline hardware vendors, even though it can neither do fork nor send a signal to a thread (oops, looks like .NET can, and it also has lighter and more efficient threads than Linux, and also has the compiler services namespace, and type safety that allows things like Silverlight security that Linux has exactly nothing to match with, and perfect integration between object, dynamic, and functional worlds).

    I understand all the .NET depends on few people and their status in Microsoft and WPF is already fading out and Muglia is gone and Silverlight is not winning big against Flash and Window Phone 7 is likely to fail and bury both Silverlight and Nokia, but the level of Linux innovation is open to discussion at best.

    My point is: Linux can built on its strength, be good to those who need that strength, reach some 10% of the desktop market by enlightening users and be never ignored, but instead it is trying to grab the "average user" which is impossible on the desktop and the last decade is mostly wasted.
    Posted 02-26-2011 at 05:20 PM by AGer AGer is offline
  7. Old Comment

    Yet another commented example of why nada

    Refusing to update is better than partially updating and breaking... Oh wait it's already broken because it's Ubuntu. Either way, I'm sure windows users are used to reinstalling anyway. On top of that, if you are using it like windows (e.g. every day with automatic updates turned on) you will probably never have such problems.

    Aside from Ubuntu's shortcomings, no company should be using it in a production environment. It's not designed for that, it's designed for the home user. Red Hat is designed at production. They have set versions, recommended up date plans, long version support, support plan built into the cost. Red Hat is also the only linux os that I've seen officially supported by server hardware.
    Posted 02-26-2011 at 02:16 PM by lumak lumak is offline
  8. Old Comment

    They do not come because they do not care

    In a fully static linked linux, we would see universal binaries. However, we only see partial static linked binaries such as drivers, blender, openoffice, firefox and other software that is designed for one large purpose. And even in that respect you have blender which is designed to fit into both the *nix file hierarchy while at the same time can exist in the users /home... Not sure if openoffice can do the same. I haven't tried.

    The old standard of /home does not quite fit the way windows users install software. They expect a /Program Files and shortcut links instead of properly defined PATH variables. Not to mention the concept of a symbolic link is completely lost on them. Rather I should say, they try and compare it to their windows shortcut links which are more akin to .desktop files.

    There is one linux distro, pointed out on 'general', that attempts to Windowize the *nix file tree. GoboLinux. But even this would require polkit and packaged binaries to install the packages.



    It almost seems like the only fix for this all is that more software programmers release universal static binaries for their programs that will target specific glibc/python/java versions and allow a user to install it as they please. Granted this is an extra compliance measure when so many even have troubles working with automake and or standards regarding the hicolor icon theme and desktop files.
    Posted 01-27-2011 at 11:08 AM by lumak lumak is offline
  9. Old Comment

    They do not come because they do not care

    I think as more people become familiar with 'app stores' and appreciate how similar (Note, similar not the same.) they are to a Linux distro's repositories they'll apreciate the benefits in security and stability that we enjoy over the free-for-all mess that installing apps on a Windows machine ends up as.
    Posted 01-27-2011 at 07:03 AM by rich_c rich_c is offline
  10. Old Comment

    Another good example of you know what

    What a nice day is it! Immediately after posting this I have got a "You cannot see this page since you are not log in" screen. So, I managed to post to a blog without being logged in? We indeed are where we are....
    Posted 06-01-2010 at 11:17 PM by AGer AGer is offline
  11. Old Comment

    My multy boot with Windows 7 rant

    I was so upset with the findings that forgot to mention a couple of details.

    First, GRUB is the only way to go with BCD since it does not require copying of the boot sector to a file each time something - the kernel or the menu - changes.

    Second, the LILO step is not necessary if grub looks for its stages at the correct place regardless of how the change loader presents the disks. And GRUB actually does so, provided you do everything correctly.

    Unfortunately, grub does not use the correct way any program should run - this is the data, that is the result. In particular, LILO has the configuration file and if I run LILO I can review what was done later. With GRUB all I have is the "grub>" prompt. Thus, nothing is documented, presumably to make it harder to proof GRUB is always alpha, as if the explanations why GRUB 2 is necessary are not enough.

    What I guess I observed, no proof left as explained above, is that the "setup" command works correctly if I specify both the install and image drives but does not work with BCD if I use the "root" command to set the default.

    Interestingly enough, GRUB docs complain that some BIOSes do not provide the correct environment for GRUB and the "d" option of "install" should be specified anyway. This issues the questions:

    - How come BIOS should know/care about GRUB?
    - Why not to make the option that never hurts the default?
    - Do GRUB developers remember there may be a chain loaded or do they think they are Microsoft too?

    The positive finding is that 3 hard drives are sufficient to play the "Linux and Windows" game: one for Windows, one for Linux, and the third one to figure out how exactly GRUB works.
    Posted 02-14-2010 at 06:16 AM by AGer AGer is offline
  12. Old Comment

    Why Linux is and always will be at 1% of desktops

    Quote:
    what of .NET and other epic failure(won't mention windows itself): did someone ever release a software working fast there? go ahead make me some graphical engine on it! lolwut? too slow? well then try building me a kernel! some operating system that will work on old Pentium 1. lolwut? it won't boot? eh, perhaps it requires 128M^x ram, yes? or needs 2core+ CPU? gates of hell! assembler ftw.

    .NET is a thingy without a future. what will you do when windows is gone, uh? will you feel yourself happy spent damn much time learning and coding that sh*t? i guess no.
    Yes, there is .NET software working fast. Like Paint.NET. Or the Singularity OS. In some synthetic tests I did C# was the fastest, beating C++ with considerable margin.

    Paint .NET requires 29 Megs of memory; GIMP - 43. Paint .NET starts in Virtual Box about 3 times faster then GIMP on XFCE. So, what looks like sh*t?

    If Windows dies in foreseeable future, it will take Microsoft with it, I hope. .NET will be liberated, get the same status as Java and replace it in no time. If Windows does not die in the foreseeable future, what's the problem?

    I guess .NET, Java, and all wannabees share one huge mistake, possibly purposely implanted. Managed code removes an object when nobody references it. Good. Now I want to get rid of an object and tell everyone that references it to stop doing so. No way.

    Quote:
    no, you're wrong. without distribution maintainers we will still have linux. a linux that will be used by web-eleet: hackers and sysadmins, the ones that really want to know more or just need stability required to serve something heavy
    You may be right here, and hope you are, but I am afraid that we passed that point already. I cannot recall a one-man distro that is not based on something else. I guess more likely Linux will be for organizations only.
    Posted 12-12-2009 at 03:34 AM by AGer AGer is offline
  13. Old Comment

    Why Linux is and always will be at 1% of desktops

    only with title i agree. partially. it isn't a desktop system mostly... with some workarounds of a skilled user system may come nice for unexperienced user...
    it's just my opinion linux is not a desktop OS.

    /* comment or not? */
    /*
    what of .NET and other epic failure(won't mention windows itself): did someone ever release a software working fast there? go ahead make me some graphical engine on it! lolwut? too slow? well then try building me a kernel! some operating system that will work on old Pentium 1. lolwut? it won't boot? eh, perhaps it requires 128M^x ram, yes? or needs 2core+ CPU? gates of hell! assembler ftw.

    .NET is a thingy without a future. what will you do when windows is gone, uh? will you feel yourself happy spent damn much time learning and coding that sh*t? i guess no.
    */

    finally...
    yes, linux is not a user system right now. from what i saw on GUI in debian lenny i can say one word: "sh*t!!!"(it isn't any stable). it's GUI that unexperienced user can possibly use is a fail. epic fail. any beginner user will say that.
    linux is more of server operating system. i'm a developer and sysadmin. i personally don't really care about GUI. most of my work except for browsing and chatting on jabber i do on console. and i'm feeling good with it.
    of course maybe other linux distros can be more user-friendly... i didn't try them because not really interested.
    again it's just my thoughts and experience.

    linux will spread in some time. it needs time. and your help.
    Quote:
    Without distribution maintainers we will have no Linux.
    no, you're wrong. without distribution maintainers we will still have linux. a linux that will be used by web-eleet: hackers and sysadmins, the ones that really want to know more or just need stability required to serve something heavy. and remember the main thing: linux was built and brought to us by hackers. it will not become more user-friendly if we won't help. hacking is an art that needs time, energy and love(like everything does).
    linux needs developers. developers that might improve/add some core features that are unstable/unimplemented by now or developers that will build a user-system, ones that will create stable GUI apps, components and other thingies. you can be the one who will help. personally i plan to dedicate years of my life improving linux in future.

    the main thing is: if you don't like something: you either don't use it or you improve/replace it.
    the second way is better.
    Posted 12-11-2009 at 06:02 PM by Web31337 Web31337 is offline
  14. Old Comment

    Windows 7 - the gap is closing

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lumak View Comment
    The plug and play has dramatically improved.
    I noticed that too. I installed Samsung New PC Studio and apparently it installed Vista drivers that were not that good with Windows 7, but Windows downloaded and installed correct drivers. However, I would attribute that mostly to the MS support servers and people who maintain them, not to the OS per se.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lumak View Comment
    It's also important to not hate any of the OS's. They all have their faults and benefits to different people.
    That is, hating an OS is actually hating people. Yes, this should not be done, however tempting.
    Posted 09-24-2009 at 01:14 PM by AGer AGer is offline
  15. Old Comment

    Windows 7 - the gap is closing

    The plug and play has dramatically improved. Even for network devices. If you plug in... say... an HD Homerun device, windows 7 will see it on the network, will offer to install the official HD Homerun software if you click on it, and work with media center...

    However, all I need to do is install MythTV and I'm up and running... well after the database setup, and the configuring thing, and the better numbering of channels thing...


    I think the important thing to realize is that Linux already is a major player in the OS world. Microsoft already considers Linux a threat and is trying to fight it on the 3rd party customer service end. It's also important to not hate any of the OS's. They all have their faults and benefits to different people. Whether it be falsely luring customers into a sense of security by saying there are NO viruses and you never have to worry about spyware, Using DRM and software subscriptions, Only being for corporate use, Or not being commercially developed for.
    Posted 09-24-2009 at 10:50 AM by lumak lumak is offline
  16. Old Comment

    Windows 7 - the gap is closing

    good write-up. I, only once and for a brief moment, thought that the day Linux will become desktop OS of choice for John SixPack is around the corner. But the more i looked and learned about OS the less illusions i had.
    Maybe it's for better, maybe not.
    Posted 09-19-2009 at 05:34 PM by DBabo DBabo is offline
  17. Old Comment

    KDE 4.2 is still below beta quality

    Preposterous and in vaid - I doubt

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by socceroos View Comment
    You took the time to write this blog post. I jolly well hope you took the time to file these bugs you're describing in the KDE bugzilla.
    I did not file any bugs. I file bugs when I feel that I have discovered something that the developers should know but are likely to not know unless I report it. When there are lots of evident problems I do not bother to file bugs.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by socceroos View Comment
    Otherwise, your words are in vain.
    I do not think so. From time to time I run over Linux faithful who sincerely wonder why so many people still use Windows. They should know what other eyes see looking at the same Linux.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by socceroos View Comment
    I've personally found KDE 4.2 to be a lot more stable and bugless than you imply.
    Stable - yes, provided you do not do reckless experiments with video. Bugless - ha! "More bugless than you imply" - possibly yes, I do imply the worst case scenario.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by socceroos View Comment
    Also, your claim that KDE 4.2 is alpha quality code is preposterous.
    Preposterous - no, maybe just deliberately choosing the old school meaning of "alpha". You know, there are people called beta testers who are getting money for beta testing beta quality code. Nobody pays to discover that which is evident. Thus, if there are evident problems - it is alpha.

    Just to double check, I visited the KDE Bugzilla. KDE is close to beta, but is not there yet.

    Now I would like to add some more of unfounded rant, but I have to log out - I checked if a newer ATI driver helps with desktop effects and accelerated video. It helps, but the Desktop Effects configuration screen got crazy and I always reboot before digging into configuration files.
    Posted 02-28-2009 at 01:58 PM by AGer AGer is offline
  18. Old Comment

    KDE 4.2 is still below beta quality

    You took the time to write this blog post. I jolly well hope you took the time to file these bugs you're describing in the KDE bugzilla.

    Otherwise, your words are in vain.

    P.S. I've personally found KDE 4.2 to be a lot more stable and bugless than you imply. It seems you're going on a bit of an unfounded rant. Also, your claim that KDE 4.2 is alpha quality code is preposterous.
    Posted 02-17-2009 at 04:43 PM by socceroos socceroos is offline
  19. Old Comment
    Posted 02-02-2009 at 08:13 AM by archtoad6 archtoad6 is offline
  20. Old Comment

    Why Desktop Linux is nowhere, part 3

    I fixed it! Thanks for the comment, with exactly zero blog experience I never thought it is possible to change an already posted entry. It just looked like rewriting history to me.
    Posted 01-27-2009 at 05:33 AM by AGer AGer is offline

  



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:46 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement

My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration