Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

Originally Posted by smeezekitty NVidia has never been customer friendly. They have always been about the $$$

I don't think you can judge a company the same way you judge a person. It's the market's job to judge a company. Their responsibility is to make the business more profitable. If they decide that resources for customer friendliness would be better spent in something else, eventually the bottom line will let them know if they were right or wrong, and they will change as necessary.

@LinuxUser42, yes that is what I meant: a way to pass on your system info online to Envidia (or whoever) and have an automated system, on their site, create the driver.

Originally Posted by linux_walt There must be a reason why someone decides not to make the driver source code available. All I can think of is that it may help reverse engineer hardware that they have spent a lot of money developing.

The main point when companies don't make drivers open source is third party intellectual property. Even if Nvidia wanted to make their driver open source, they are legally bound to not open up parts that they have licensed from other parties.

Originally Posted by LinuxUser42 That said, Miati has it a bit wrong, as Nvidia, doesn't create a driver based on your hardware/software spec's the way linux_walt's post read to me. They just provide precomplied ones.

Actually, it is a mix of both. The proprietary drivers from AMD and Nvidia contain a pre-compiled part (the actual driver) and a part which has to be compiled against the kernel in use. The latter part is not much more than a stub, interfacing the pre-compiled code with the kernel.

The same is true for the userspace part, interfacing with Xorg.

Originally Posted by TobiSGD The main point when companies don't make drivers open source is third party intellectual property. Even if Nvidia wanted to make their driver open source, they are legally bound to not open up parts that they have licensed from other parties.

Now I'm wondering if Linus Torvalds was aware of this when he stuck his finger in the camera. I'll have to watch the video again and see what exactly ticked him off.

Originally Posted by TobiSGD Actually, it is a mix of both. The proprietary drivers from AMD and Nvidia contain a pre-compiled part (the actual driver) and a part which has to be compiled against the kernel in use. The latter part is not much more than a stub, interfacing the pre-compiled code with the kernel. The same is true for the userspace part, interfacing with Xorg.

I think your missing a subtle point. It isn't JUST software. In several distro's and even on others, one can compile and run a custom kernal, with ONLY the stuff needed for their system. Where a lot of distro's give you a kernal that provides support for a lot of things, your not going to use. In my statement, I meant both hardware and software. Your system info gets sent and a custom compile, kernel with the binary blob that attaches, would both be there.

Originally Posted by linux_walt Now I'm wondering if Linus Torvalds was aware of this when he stuck his finger in the camera. I'll have to watch the video again and see what exactly ticked him off.

If it is the one I am thinking of, he mentioned nothing about the proprietary part, but was more angry about their "no support is coming" statement, when they push chips, to Android devices (linux based). So it isn't just about the NDA part that they deal with, it is also the "I am taking my ball and going home" attitude.

Originally Posted by LinuxUser42 In my statement, I meant both hardware and software. Your system info gets sent and a custom compile, kernel with the binary blob that attaches, would both be there.

This would open up a whole bunch of issues with privacy. Not to mention that, on a modern desktop or laptop computer, you will run into serious troubles with hardware that was not present at compile time, like USB storage devices, laptops with switchable Bluetooth or WLAN devices, game controllers, graphics tablets, ... . Also, the system compiling your kernel would not be able to determine which file systems you need support for, etc.

I agree with you on that. IMHE though, people give up privacy for convienence (just look at Facebook as an example).
Not much different then what I have experienced with users giving up security for convienence.

Originally Posted by LinuxUser42 I agree with you on that. IMHE though, people give up privacy for convienence (just look at Facebook as an example). Not much different then what I have experienced with users giving up security for convienence.

Most of the time I would. Sorry but I don't like jumping through hoops for a relatively low chance of
a security breach.

Actually the idea is interesting. To have a website that could build things like the Linux kernel for you.
Even if it is manually configured.

Hi, guys this is not meant to be a troll or flamebait and I can't be the only one who feels this way. I started using linux in 1997 when it was still exclusively for geeks. It was also more unix-like back then. Linux made me fall in love with Unix and eventually migrated to the *BSDs for a while (NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD)and then dabbled back into linux here and there. So anyway recently I installed slackware-current because slackware stable doesn't support my hardware and I don't have enough time (I'm a busy person and slackware is time consuming enough already to initially setup 'just right' for my needs) to make my own slackware ISO image of 14.1 with a newer kernel. Using slackware-current with multilib I was compiling a program I needed in 32 compatability mode and the system, being -current, was unstable a buggy so the compilation processes ran wild and ate up all my resources slowing my machine down to glacial speeds. This is not slackware's fault of course because one should expect such things running -current. Anyway, I said "screw this I need something that just works out of the box because I am so busy I need to focus on getting real work done" so I installed Fedora. That is when it hit me the wider mainstream linux systems are much less like unix and more like windows. For instance when I would close a program it would ask me "Do you really want to do this ?" with a GUI dialog box and that is not Unix behavior because Unix assumes the user knows what he is doing and gets out of their way. Also, in terminal with bash shell I tried to get Firefox to run in an SElinux sandbox and the program was failing but it didn't fail the proper unix way in the terminal. In a *nix system when a program fails to work properly it is supposed to follow this rule : "Rule of Repair: When you must fail, fail noisily and as soon as possible." Not only did it not follow this rule but it also didn't generate any logs or anything either that would help troubleshoot the problem. You see as Linux is changing recently with Wayland/systemd/etc, it's removing itself more and more from being a Unix-like system and becoming its own entity. It is making itself less compatible with true Unix and Unix-like systems to the point where these real systems have developed a "don't care" attitude toward Linux. So guess what ? Linux can't out-windows windows itself so I no point in running linux anymore when I can just run the genuine article Microsoft windows. After I post this message I am going to burn a Windows 8.1 ISO and upgrade it to Windows 10 technical preview. You know it is a sad day when a person who has been using Linux since 1997 no longer sees a point in running Linux but instead prefers Windows.

I know slackware hasn't sold out to the wider general trend in Linux yet per se but Slackware is a niche distro and it has been dying for about 15 years or more now slowly and Slackware can't resist the wider changes in the larger linux community forever. The borg will assimilate slackware sooner or later or at least to some degree. I still have a special place in my heart for slackware and I know Pat "the man" makes his living from Slackware so this makes what I am going to say hard but I can't take one man's livelihood and prioritize it over the greater good the wider technical open source community. My recommendation is that people who still care about Unix use either MacOSX on their desktops or PC-BSD and run FreeBSD as their servers with OpenBSD used for IDS's , Gateways and firewalls. If your more technical orientated and it suppors your hardware you may bypass PC-BSD and use FreeBSD on your desktop -- it stable like Slackware and Debian and has newer software comparable to Ubuntu in the ports tree (PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD ,BTW).

According to a KDE developer PC-BSD will overtake Linux on the desktop by the year 2020 :

http://lukewolf.blogspot.com/2015/02...pc-bsd-on.html

Those of us who still value OpenSource *nix systems should be helping PC-BSD overcome Linux as much as possible and promote the destruction, failure and demolition of Linux. Linux will fail, given its current course, it is only a matter of time now and is inevitable. So, yes, I am installing Windows and I'll never use linux but I plan in the future to use MacOSX on the desktop (I can still hack on open source and use open source *nix programs thanks to its Darwin core) and FreeBSD for servers and OpenBSD for other networking stuff. Also this is not meant to turn into a license dispute if you are not communist/socialist pinko but you like OpenSource *nix systems for technical reasons then there is no reason why this thread should turn into a dispute about GPL license vs BSD license.

Most desktop uses are not technical people. Microsoft uses this to get more market share. Big linux distros are also going this path. Making it a hell for technical people to use/modify/make of Linux OS system. Ready made/paid solutions are the model of Microsoft and these days of Big Linux Distros too. So you have a correct point indeed.

But I don't think Linux would die in years, just because of one/many user with one aspect of using it dislikes it. Long live Linux.

Things have been relatively peaceful here since you last pushed your agenda, and everyone else's buttons. That one resulted in a lot of turmoil and damaged relationships among members here. I hope you were well entertained.

Other than that, thread hijacking tirades about systemd, necro-posting threads about systemd, and your your systemd on Slackware oriented introduction, I don't see where you have contributed much of anything useful here on LQ - just my opinion.

As noted by others, we don't need a hundred "I'm moving away from {Slackware|Linux|*BSD}" threads. And as noted in that linked post, and by myself in another context, you do seem to have arrived here with an agenda, and IMO this thread is yet another attempt to push that agenda.

If you plan to switch to Window$ I wish you the best of luck, but I wish you would just do so and leave the rest of us in peace without a final stirring of the pot before you go.

Originally Posted by astrogeek Things have been relatively peaceful here since you last pushed your agenda, and everyone else's buttons. That one resulted in a lot of turmoil and damaged relationships among members here. I hope you were well entertained. Other than that, thread hijacking tirades about systemd, necro-posting threads about systemd, and your your systemd on Slackware oriented introduction, I don't see where you have contributed much of anything useful here on LQ - just my opinion. As noted by others, we don't need a hundred "I'm moving away from {Slackware|Linux|*BSD}" threads. And as noted in that linked post, and by myself in another context, you do seem to have arrived here with an agenda, and IMO this thread is yet another attempt to push that agenda. If you plan to switch to Window$ I wish you the best of luck, but I wish you would just do so and leave the rest of us in peace without a final stirring of the pot before you go.

Oh, yeah, what agenda is that ? The previous poster seemed to understand what I was saying to some extent without accusing me of having an agenda; his interpretation of what I was saying is basically that Linux is being dumbed down making it harder for technical people, like myself, to use. That is one way to construe what I was saying but I don't think he totally comprehended what I was saying. You know what my only agenda is ? I want a Open Source Unix operating system on my computer. Is that too much to ask for ? I don't think so. OpenBSD doesn't support my wireless card and FreeBSD does (which is strange since OpenBSD has some of the best wireless support in the open source world) and FreeBSD only supports my graphics card with the vesa driver which is not acceptable to me. I could buy a Wifi usb dongle that OpenBSD supports but I'm not so sure xenocara and KMS in the kernel would support my card so it might use vesa too. So I used to be able to rely on Linux being a unix-like system to fall back on but Linux is not like Unix anymore or is becoming less like Unix. I also did install Windows (I'm using it right now) and it is much better than using linux especially that shitty Gnome3 interface that Fedora uses. Even Linus says Gnome3 is a piece of crap in not so many words. Linux has now gotten to the point where it makes more sense to use Windows instead. BTW, disclaimer, OpenBSD is my favorite operating system and although it can be made into a geek desktop (a somewhat more spartan one) the project is really niche security project aimed at running network infrastructure for internet facing computers .e.g. firewalls, IDS's, and gateways so it doesn't have features like usb passthrough on new virtual machines that can support the latest version of windows etc.. (there are just some things I need windows for I can't get around it) I don't blame them because the desktop is not their focus -- PC-BSD focuses on the desktop.

"Linux people do what they do because they hate Microsoft. We do what we do because we love Unix."-- Theo De Raadt (project leader of OpenSD). The irony of Linux people always spewing hatred towards Microsoft is expressed perfectly by Theo : "They have the same rapid development cycle[as Microsoft Windows], which leads to crap." -- Theo De Raadt.

Evidently most Linux people don't give a shit about Unix especially new school linux users.

"I think our code quality is higher, just because thats really a big focus for us." --Theo De Raadt says.

"Linux has never been about quality. There are so many parts of the system that are just these cheap little hacks, and it happens to run."--Theo De Raadt

"I don't know what his [Linus Torvalds'] focus is at all anymore, but it isn't quality." --Theo De Raadt.

Anyway, I think it is safe to say I absolutely hate linux now but I have good reasons to hate it. I'm now much happier using Windows but I would be even happier using FreeBSD if I could.

Linux is going to fail for many reasons including that it doesn't know what it wants to be. Does it want to be like Windows or does it want to be like Unix etc..? Apparently given systemd (which is like svchost.exe in Windows) and that other non-unix behaviour I described in my original post lately it wants to be like Windows. However, like I said Linux can't out-windows windows. Windows does windows best so linux is doomed to failure.

Well, regardless of how anyone will feel about it, I figured I'd share the news that Greg Kroah-Hartman finally got kdbus added into the Linux-Next kernel. No idea if this will ever trickle down as -Next always has various stuff added and ripped out, but it is in the kernel now, so very soon, start making your decisions and be prepared to stick by them.

Originally Posted by UnixPhilosophy Those of us who still value OpenSource *nix systems should be helping PC-BSD overcome Linux as much as possible and promote the destruction, failure and demolition of Linux.

If you value Open Source UNIX systems then it is non-sensical to come here and promote Windows or OS X, since none of them is an open source UNIX system. Also, if you value open source UNIX systems the just use them, just because you don't like Linux doesn't mean it has to be destroyed. It doesn't make sense to promote the destruction of an open source software, if you are not satisfied how the development works then fork or create an alternative. And how again do you follow your own recommendation to help PC-BSD with using Windows instead?

Linux is going to fail for many reasons including that it doesn't know what it wants to be. Does it want to be like Windows or does it want to be like Unix etc..?

Did it ever occur to you that Linux is an independent OS and does not have to be like Windows or UNIX, but maybe just wants to be Linux?

Anyways, your post doesn't make much sense, you are basically saying: Linux wants to be more like Windows. I hate that, so I switch to Windows. As I see it, this whole thread is just meant as flamebait and I have to ask all LQ members to watch out and not to fall for it.