The list is quite extensive! If you have patience to read and post your respective points of view, it is worth reading.
75% of the complaints have to do with driver support, if linux already had the market share of windows or OSX this would be a non-issue.
But given the adoption rate, it's decent.
The remainder is somewhat nit picking
One of the problems is that some commands in linux even though they know damn well people will try to use them like in windows if they're trying to switch, they're mapped differently for no fucking reason just than to be different, ctrl-v for pasting comes to mind in some programs.
Not to nitpick, but I don't recall ever coming across a program in Linux that didn't use ctrl+v to paste, other than the terminal in Ubuntu (in that case it was ctrl+shift+v).
I think Linux is almost there. Once the kinks in LibreOffice are worked out and the overall OS UI/UX is a little nicer, I think we'd have Linux OSes that could actually compete in consumer space.
> think Linux is almost there.
Same. I've tried to used it a few times (once @ 2006 and once @2010) and when I installed it this year I was blown back by having everything "just werk" external soundcard included.
I know by just saying "linux" it's kinda broad but you get the idea.
Eh, I find it mostly full of shit.
X is broken. I agree
Nvidia are fucks and x is broken, I agree.
Network manager is shit, systemd is shit, I agree.
But the vast majority of his complaints were that Linux isn't enough like windows and that Linux development isn't as standard as windows. The "20 years of binary compatibility" is complete shit. There are very very few binaries that still work on Windows since the 2000 days, much less earlier, and this is entirely due to the awful security and driver infrastructure that windows had in those days. Otoh Linux kernel does not break ABI for userspace ever. You can run a graphical program that uses X, opengl, gtk, glibc, pthreads, etc from 1995 trivially in Linux as long as it was statically linked.
Which is one of the reasons Linux developers are adamant about free software. It can be trivially recompiled to work on any future version if it works now. No need for ABI at the libc layer if you can just link it in.
He brings up mtp and smb as examples of lacking capabilities, and then says libmtp and samba aren't good enough because muh not kernel native. Fuck off.
Sound is definitely a problem, but its "good enough" these days for most people. It must get better before its good enough for audio engineers though.
GNU/Linux has some GREAT features/parts, the Linux kernel for example, the file systems, but the sum of the parts sucks.
OS X on the other hand has components/parts that are abysmal, but the whole thing is better than the sum of its parts.
Yes. I saw this text. I like the texts that guy because he touches the wound of each of the operating systems.
It's a much wider view and less fanboy than those found periodically.
I know, but i still think that the guy exaggerates a lot of things though (his wording doesn't help him to be taken seriously and can get very rude if you don't agree with him if you read the commentaries)
>Kernel version: 2.6.3
Yeah no thanks but they are literally throwing shit out of the water.
Just the first few problems have been resolved
>Open Source NVIDIA driver is much slower (up to five times) than its proprietary counterpart due to improperly working power management.
Slower how? They post no reference.
>NVIDIA Optimus technology and ATI dynamic GPU switching are still not supported on Linux out of the box in any existing distro. AMD hybrid graphics support is lousy and very incomplete.
>The most recent test shows that open source AMD and NVIDIA drivers struggle to properly support many types of video cards.
Links are from 2014 and these problems have been adressed
Some of it is just pure ignorance.
I have seen multiple people right click and select paste even though middleclick is way easier. I really don't mind that you have to use shift in the terminal and that you can Ctrl+y if you use a different buffer.
These things are expected because I grew up with these "issues".
Most graphical applications use the Ctrl + letter keyboard paradigm though.
I have gotten used to this and having weird hand positions are easy to remember so I use those a lot.
I don't think this is a problem for new users though.
>Linux is shit
>Windows is shit
So should I just go BSD desktop at this point? What's the best choice for starters, PC-BSD? I've heard it's buggy but not sure if that was an exaggeration or not.
Inconsistency between various applications that you'd expect to work identically is a big pet peeve of mine. Take three graphical package managers and I guarantee each one has completely different default shortcuts for actions, sometimes with opposite functions from each other.
Yes. Compared to 2006, a lot of stuff just works now.
I started learning about linux in 2005-6 and it is a lot better now.
Using it all the time, you are more prone to noticing when software you like go a different direction or when you discover a new DE that really works for you but overall, it is really good.
I think Ubuntu did a great job of showing other distro how easy it should be to use linux on the desktop.
It was fun when there were all these stripped down XP clones where they pressed the XP ISO down to 50-100mb and still had a functional system.
If Microsoft made a version like that, without the malware, they might be a threat to linux.
But instead they replaced all the Chinese malware with their own and doubled down on the bloat.
Brilliant. Spam a zillion bullshit points in the hope others can't debunk them all. Classic Gish Gallup.
I'll skip the huge wall of text and go to the TL;DR:
>No stability, bugs, regressions, regressions and regressions
Depends on the distro. Debian Stable is, unsurprisingly, stable and well tested. You will almost never run into regressions.
Use a stable distro and you get stability. Use a bleeding-edge unstable distro and you don't. Shocking.
>The lack of standardization, fragmentation, unwarranted & excessive variety, as well as no common direction or vision among different distros
It's standardized within distros. Debian is compatible with Debian. Ubuntu is compatible with Ubuntu. Arch is compatible with Arch. All of these systems have large communities and a wealth of documentation. Other distros working differently does not mean each distro works worse.
This is like saying Windows sucks because it does not have a common vision with OS X.
>The lack of cooperation between open source developers and internal wars
Totes irrelevant. What matters is the quality of the product, not how it got there.
>A lot of rapid changes
Why is this a problem? Rapid improvements are a good thing. The user-visible changes are usually subtle.
And if there are too many changes, no one forces you to install updates. Installing updates is always OPTIONAL, which is often not the case on Windows.
And this is rich:
>please, don't remind me of PPAs and backports - these hacks are not officially supported, nor guaranteed to work
So PPAs, which were developed by Canonical, are an unofficial hack? Brilliant.
Maybe this moron is trying to say that software from PPAs is not officially audited, tested, and endorsed by the repo maintainers. Which is true! However, practically no software on Windows or OS X is audited, tested, or endorsed by MS or Apple. The software is not officially supported, but that is not a disadvantage. It's merely the lack of an advantage Linux users are used to.
Last time I've checked on FreeBSD it only had a couple half-finished projects for them.
What about GhostBSD? Google says it comes with a manager and it's also FreeBSD derived. I hate Gnome and MATE though...
>OpenCL and multiGPU rendering are not supported by open source drivers.
I'm using OpenCL with the new amdgpu drivers at this very moment. Granted, it's not in the upstream kernel yet. But it will arrive in 4.5
Why the fuck do you faggots want all the normies to use Linux for their email and games so badly? Who gives a fuck about this dead horse.
Just use it for your dev/ricing/superioirty complex needs and get on with life.
>How different is the repository infrastructure for BSDs compared to Linux?
Now you got me. I do not quite understand this thing repositories. Just know that in the case of FreeBSD, it uses the ports.
For the netbsd (if memory serves me correctly) software are compiled from the source code.
A basic comparative Introduction to FreeBSD for Linux Users:
>The end result is the same
Yup! But it's a matter of where you assign the blame. Linux is working perfectly and your shitty hardware is the problem.
Go ahead and say you won't use Linux because of hardware incompatibility problems, but say that the drivers don't support Linux rather than the other way around.
>where does that leave lintards?
With a working system. Linux wireless drivers work just fine for anything remotely common. The only hardware support that is really questionable these days is graphics.
i think in the next five years, especially if Steam OS is successful in porting games to Linux, there is going to be a massive exodus of disillusioned Windows users who don't like W8 - 10.
the only thing holding people back right now is literally photoshop, MS Office, and vidya.
like 95% of this could be dealt with by an OEM, which is how almost everyone gets a computer, it's not fair to compare Linux installed by oneself on arbitrary hardware to a factory built PC
Tried to set up Ubuntu GNOME on desktop from live CD
>MFW the fucking KEYBOARD isn't working
>Unity spin the keyboard works
>KDE spin the keyboard works
>any closed-source OS
U mad because it Just Werks on said closed-source OS?
You know this also means OEMs will come up with their own distros/DEs untill buying a 'linux machine' is even worse than freshly bought Androids. Ads, shitty programs and whatnot everywhere.
but honestly I remember when my notebook running windows 7 ultimate SP1 started notifying me about the windows 10 update
I removed every system update that was telemetry related as well as every scheduled task in the task manager
when I finished it I took a look at the remaining tasks in the task manager and there was something called ''telemetrydx4'' or ''telemetrydx3'' something like that; and I couldn't do anything about this one
it was listed under ''ongoing tasks'' -> repeat every 12 hours
GNOME is garbage, son
I've did, many of them feel kinda clunky and unresponsive. Maybe configs can fix that, but who can give so many shits just to get it working properly really.
IceWM is really comfy though, I'd just need to mix it up with a half decent terminal and file manager and a bunch of configs but really, it's a bit too much hassle at once for a unix newb
Just embrace it.
But anyhow my point is that I find it silly that some losers here believe they're safe by installing some open source OS (what was hearthbleed?) and don't even realise most computers have physical backdoors that are activated through the internet.
I've seen a presentation from some hacker convention where a guy would fire a certain string of bits into a computer through the LAN cable and something changed, yet nothing could be seen or detected at ALL. The PC didn't even know what was going on.
I heard it's possible to take a look at what's appearing on a computer screen just by monitoring the electrical variation of the device
since each millisecond of energy variation could be translated into pixels changing colors and that of course, translated into a entire picture
Any DE that can't accomodate its users' needs collectively IS bad for everyone. Who knows what brilliant rigid overhaul they introduce in GNOME 4 with this sort of approach. If XFCE, LXDE, KDE can seamlessly accomodate many types of user needs, why can't GNOME?
I'm a user, I can tell you what a user needs. If they're not developing this to cater to users' needs, who are they developing it for? It's a fucking desktop environment, not an artistic statement.
Being able to put your taskbar on one of the sides of the screen should indeed be an option on every DE.
And that's coming from a guy that uses windows 90% of the time and always had the taskbar at the bottom.
A lot of this shit doesn't affect people outside of very specific cases. I've been using Linux on the desktop exclusively for over 4 years and I've only encountered most of these issues once or twice, if at all.
Some things I would even say "it's not a bug, it's a feature". For example
>X.org allows applications to exclusively grab keyboard and mouse input. If such applications misbehave you are left with a system you cannot manage, you cannot even switch to text terminals
Is one of the things keeping me from switching to Wayland, because it enables something like sxhkd
Honestly I stopped taking them seriously when they began complaining about font rendering. I installed a Windows vm today and the first thing I noticed was the horrible font rendering, it's way worse than on Linux
>I'm a user, I can tell you what a user needs.
No you can't. You can tell us what you want, but what you want may only ultimately appeal to just a tiny fraction of all users. A finite amount of developers with a finite amount of time may not find it worth it to support you else the general quality of their software dies amid an ever expanding codebase and test matrix.
>No you can't. You can tell us what you want, but what you want may only ultimately appeal to just a tiny fraction of all users.
And so, by step-by-step removing all the tiny fractions of users who've been thinking differently from the lowest common denominator, we've created OSX.
Guess what, MATE is derived from a previous version of GNOME. Cinnamon is too and it doesn't have vertical taskbar either. Meanwhile every other DE doesn't have this problem. See a pattern here?
Three days of streaming music, sports and playing BL2 on Kubuntu. Flawlessly.. You're an idiot or you've got shit hardware. Lemme guess. Dual booting on a laptop?
It's a simple demonstration that if you support more and more configurations, your QA work expands exponentially and the amount of code you maintain grows, inevitably resulting in poorer quality software that tries to please everyone but fails in many big and small ways. This is especially crucial for free software projects with small teams who work in their free time.
What's your point? They're happy users.
Actually this guy is full of shit, among others:
>Everything should be configurable through GUI because reasons
>conveniently ignoring samba and claiming nfs is shit (even though it's faster and in my case easier to set up)
>things which are just provably false (too many to name)
I mean between all the bollocks he does hit a fair number of good points (battery management, Nvidia Optimus, audio mess), but in the same piece of text he'll claim Linux has no Antivirus (what is ClamAV, also implying it's necessary)
s/Linux/GNU+Linux/g, I'm in mobile
>what was hearthbleed?
A critical bug that was patched immediately after being disclosed. Sorry if, unlike you, i can have an OS that i can update with the latest security patches anytime without feeling that i'm "fucked anyway".
>your QA work expands exponentially and the amount of code you maintain grows, inevitably resulting in poorer quality software that tries to please everyone but fails in many big and small ways
So why isn't LXDE a buggy POS then?
>They're happy users.
People in sanitariums are often happy too.
Linux is made for its users, by its users and its users employers
Its users run servers and workstations, not desktops
This is why all the quality software is for a few niche fields of work and everything else is trash written for free by people who aren't even close to their target audience
Who cares about the pipe dreams of freetards and disgruntled windows users? Fuck them. Ganoo linux is B E T T E R as a server/workstation OS. Use the right tool for the job, fucker. Install fucking android if you want your normie OS on the linux kernel.
>Not to nitpick, but I don't recall ever coming across a program in Linux that didn't use ctrl+v to paste, other than the terminal in Ubuntu (in that case it was ctrl+shift+v).
Yeah, Linux terminals can't do Ctrl-V for pasting and it drives me nuts, coming from OS X where Command-V pastes in terminals just like it does in every other application.
Sometimes exaggeration is what's required to get an issue looked at and resolved. Way too often problems just get swept under the rug and shrugged about because the FOSS crowd is used to dealing with them and see them as non-issues.
I really don't think so. When someone is in the middle of working and constantly tabbing between applications, hotkey discrepancies are probably going to be the very last thing on their mind, resulting in a reflexive pressing of Ctrl-V for no result at all. It can be learned for sure, but it's going to take several failures and a temporary mental imperative to remember that this ONE program out of thousands and thousands of programs pastes differently for whatever reason. It's unnecessary friction.
If that's true, it's great but I don't see why it has to be a snowflake in the first place.
After having actually read the article, most of this isn't about problems with Linux or unixlikes, but about problems with capitalists intentionally making unixlikes worse while only communists and anarchists make unixlikes better.
>If that's true, it's great but I don't see why it has to be a snowflake in the first place.
It's how it was done in Unix and they have no reason to really change it. I like just highlighting and middle-mouse better anyway
Linux was ok to use on 2005. Since then it failed too hard for caring about security or whatever it can offer for regular users that just pirate windows and good proprietary software that doesn't constantly break the OS.