Linux Sucks

[Anteaus]

Ok, it really doesn't suck, but I found some videos by a guy named Bryan Lunduke who does these talks on the parts of Linux that really do kinda suck and how to make them not suck. I'm not saying I agree with everything he says but he makes solid points. I personally liked the 2012 and 2014 videos. Some of you have already seen them but I'd give them a shot if you haven't. This guy knows his Linux.

2012

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh-cnaJoGCw

2013

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKwWPQ1Orzs

2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pOxlazS3zs

 

[lxskllr]

Bryan Sucks...

http://diaryofanaspiringnerd.blogspot.com/2012/11/why-lunduke-is-hurting-open-source.html

I might give Linux Action Show another view. I didn't realize Lunduke was gone, so the show might have improved.

 

[Anteaus]

He does have a lot of personal weaknesses, but it doesn't make him wrong about everything. I've said for years that the virtue of Linux is its open source nature; however, that same open source nature is an impediment to wide spread adoption on a consumer level. Linux servers are great, but Linux desktops are hit and miss.

Standardization is a must. Linux Standard Base looks to be a step in the right direction.

 

[FrankRamiro]

He does have a lot of personal weaknesses, but it doesn't make him wrong about everything. I've said for years that the virtue of Linux is its open source nature; however, that same open source nature is an impediment to wide spread adoption on a consumer level. Linux servers are great, but Linux desktops are hit and miss.

Standardization is a must. Linux Standard Base looks to be a step in the right direction.

(but Linux desktops are hit and miss).

Maybe so, but Linux gets the job done,at least on my end,i have not yet discovered something i can't do with Linux that i do with other OPS(maybe i did not look hard enough!) and those OPS you have to pay a big price,of course there are some loose ends,my question is what OPS doesn't have them! for a free OPS you all should be blessed and kiss its grounds;just my opinion.

 

[Anteaus]

(but Linux desktops are hit and miss).

Maybe so, but Linux gets the job done,at least on my end,i have not yet discovered something i can't do with Linux that i do with other OPS(maybe i did not look hard enough!) and those OPS you have to pay a big price,of course there are some loose ends,my question is what OPS doesn't have them! for a free OPS you all should be blessed and kiss its grounds;just my opinion.

Fair point. Getting the job done does matter, but the way it gets done is also important. Based purely on what you just said, you would use Windows if it were free. I'm thinking that's not the whole story, and I think many people tend to overlook Linux deficiencies because of a desire to "circle the wagons".

I'm ok with the fact that Linux isn't perfect, because as you pointed out it is free. That's the catch-22. Because it's free, money is a scare resource and while there are some rich fans out there willing to throw in some cash, it will never been enough to pull everyone together and create a Linux distro to rule them all, and by extension Windows. It's not being free that holds Linux back. It's that because it's free it hasn't gotten good enough to compete in the mainstream. Until mom and pop in Oklahoma can use Linux without relying on others, it won't ship on computers in large numbers.

I never understood the price argument though. An OEM Windows Pro license costs a little more than $100 dollars. I spend more than that on games in one month. Even a couple hundred dollars over the life of an OS isn't very much compared to the software purchased to run on it, which will be paid even by Linux users if they ever want developers like Adobe to port over. On the corporate side it can be expensive, but how many corporations do you know that use Linux as their preferred workstations? Servers, yes. Workstations, no.

 

[lxskllr]

I never understood the price argument though. An OEM Windows Pro license costs a little more than $100 dollars. I spend more than that on games in one month. Even a couple hundred dollars over the life of an OS isn't very much compared to the software purchased to run on it, which will be paid even by Linux users if they ever want developers like Adobe to port over. On the corporate side it can be expensive, but how many corporations do you know that use Linux as their preferred workstations? Servers, yes. Workstations, no.

I agree regarding the price. $100 to make your useless pile of parts do something is amazing. I use GNU/Linux for the freedom, and would pay to do so. I'd pay more than I would for Windows in fact.

The real cost of proprietary software is the lock-in. You have one source of upgrades, one source of support, and one failure point. I have a bunch of issues at work due to proprietary software. It's old software, powering old equipment, but it works. Nothing newer is needed aside from the issues that come from a single developer not feeling like supporting the system anymore.

I don't think a standard base is desirable aside from the loose standard of Debian/Ubuntu, RedHat, and source code. We don't need another Windows or Apple. GNU/Linux's strength is its diversity, and its adoption rate reflects that. ~2% on the desktop seems low, unless you consider that's millions of people that are using it. Millions isn't a small number anywhere, and that's the only "failure" of the Linux kernel. Everywhere else it either dominates, or is competitive with other solutions.

 

[KillerBee]

Bryan Sucks...

http://diaryofanaspiringnerd.blogspot.com/2012/11/why-lunduke-is-hurting-open-source.html

I might give Linux Action Show another view. I didn't realize Lunduke was gone, so the show might have improved.

I'm just the opposite - feel it really went downhill w/o his input.

jupiterbroadcasting does have a lot of other good shows though ... especially Techsnap and the BSD ones.

the http://www.badvoltage.org podcasts are good
with Jono Bacon, Jeremy Garcia, Stuart Langridge, and Bryan Lunduke

 

[Cerb]

Indeed it does. Luckily, I have to deal with Windows on a daily basis, so when I get home, or need to do something Windows is really bad at, I don't even mind Ubuntu all that much .

Now, when can X finally really and truly be replaced?

 

[Scarpozzi]

M$ security is shit. IE is terrible and it is way too integrated in the OS WITH FAR TOO MANY system rights. If I wasn't running Xubuntu, I'd be tempted to pay Apple and I hate turtlenecks.

 

[Jodell88]

Now, when can X finally really and truly be replaced?

Depends on what software you use but next 6 months at the earliest, maybe.

 

[gus6464]

He does make some very good points in the 2014 edition. For example X11 being an old outdated pile of shit which it is.

 

[Jodell88]

He does make some very good points in the 2014 edition. For example X11 being an old outdated pile of shit which it is.

And it's replacement is under development isand has been in use.

 

[bastecklein]

I'm ok with the fact that Linux isn't perfect, because as you pointed out it is free. That's the catch-22. Because it's free, money is a scare resource and while there are some rich fans out there willing to throw in some cash, it will never been enough to pull everyone together and create a Linux distro to rule them all, and by extension Windows. It's not being free that holds Linux back. It's that because it's free it hasn't gotten good enough to compete in the mainstream. Until mom and pop in Oklahoma can use Linux without relying on others, it won't ship on computers in large numbers.

There always seems to be this assumption in and out of the Linux community that it needs to gain some significant market share against Windows in order to be a success. By and large though, Linux has been a decentralized community project maintained and used by hobbyists and enthusiasts. It has no business model that requires market share and profits like Windows or Mac.

I think that the strength of Linux is derived from its openness and versatility rather than its market share. The fact that anybody can take its base and turn it into whatever they want is a major strength. Projects like Android, Chrome OS, and Steam OS would never have been possible with Windows or OSX. And Android is proof that a company with proper resources and marketing can turn Linux into a market powerhouse. But since the vast majority of distros have neither marketing or capital, they will likely never dethrone Windows. I'm just not sure that it needs to.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Forum Fiend v1.2.7.

 

[MongGrel]

I'd always been curious about Linux, used to even use Unix a small bit and never really got into it myself I guess.

Just never went down that path I guess personally.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I don't agree that Linux itself sucks, but he has some good points. On forking, I see what he means. Too many of the same thing. But on the other hand, it does give more choice, but, it also makes it hard for people to write for Linux because they either need to try to make their stuff compatible with every possible fork, or choose one and have a smaller audience. Too many distros, so it makes it hard for coders (ex: game devs) to target Linux as a whole. There is only a few version of Windows to worry about in Microsoftland so compatibility is easier.

Agree with X11 and crappy multi monitor support, X needs to be replaced with something that is rewritten from ground up. Though I like how yo can run X11 apps in "citrix" mode, so it would be nice if it's replacement could do that too. But biggest thing is multi monitor, really needs to be fixed.

 

[JManInPhoenix]

I have been using Linux since 2006 (mostly Ubuntu) and have overall been satisfied with it. I am currently running a single 27" monitor on 14.04 but remember well the pain in the ass of getting two 19" monitors into one big desktop. Early on, it took a ton of googling to get it to work. The last time I had dual monitors was with 10.04 and that was pretty painless - just went into the ATI control center and enabled it, the rebooted.

If I had a dollar for every linux install I borked by messing around with it :hmm:

 

[Red Squirrel]

Dual is not too bad, the issue is 3 because going across multiple video cards seem to just not work. It's also very hard to make anything but the 1st monitor the primary. I don't even think Linux/X has the concept of a primary monitor. If you have 3, typically you want the middle one to be primary otherwise it's going to be hard on the neck.

I also hate how in all multi monitor solutions I've seen, including Windows, stuff opens where it wants. The way it needs to work is anything you launch is opened on the same screen as the cursor. Stop remembering where it was last time, I just care about now and right now, if I'm double clicking an icon that's on the 2nd monitor then I want it to open on the 2nd monitor. Then you move the app, and any dialogs from that app can end up anywhere... no, I want it to open within the app! This is my biggest pet peeve with multi monitors in any environment. Seems nobody can get this right, not even Microsoft.

 

[mv2devnull]

Ok, so X sucks. What has that to do with Linux?

 

[Anteaus]

Ok, so X sucks. What has that to do with Linux?

Because like it or not, Linux is perceived by the world as the sum of the parts shipped with it. Underneath the GUI (Blah Metro), Windows 8 is actually a great OS, but no one cares about that because of the usability issues. The same goes with Linux. The kernel could be rock solid and as perfect as can be, but if the quality of the applications used on it suffer, then so goes Linux.

X is the foundation of most GUI space within Linux distros today. If it has problems, then Linux suffers by association.

My .02

 

[ch33zw1z]

I have been using Linux since 2006 (mostly Ubuntu) and have overall been satisfied with it. I am currently running a single 27" monitor on 14.04 but remember well the pain in the ass of getting two 19" monitors into one big desktop. Early on, it took a ton of googling to get it to work. The last time I had dual monitors was with 10.04 and that was pretty painless - just went into the ATI control center and enabled it, the rebooted.

If I had a dollar for every linux install I borked by messing around with it :hmm:

I've been using different distro's on and off since '04. January 2013 is when I went full on Linux. My main rig runs Ubuntu 12.04, has two monitors setup no problem, runs a EVGA 275 no problem, Steam no problem, RAID1 with cronjob rsync to a spare disk.

Overall, I have spent so little time getting it to work compared to older versions, I was a little surprised. It's rock solid, and user friendly. I remember beating some of the old releases to death trying to get some stuff to work, but 12.04 is pretty good.

 

[ultimatebob]

Yeah... X11 still sucks. Multimonitor support is bad, and touch screen support is also horrible. It's still my number one complaint about Linux right now.

 

[KillerBee]

I guess I'm jaded after running linux for so many years - it just seems so easy now compared to the old days

Even BSD with PC-BSD is almost plug and play
http://www.pcbsd.org/

 

[Anteaus]

I've been watching a lot of Richard Stallman's videos on Youtube lately. I was surprised about how little I knew about the differences between free software and "free" software. Given how much "non-free" software many Linux distro developers have been shipping lately to help bridge features, I'm wondering if it will hurt the pure GNU community in the long run. It's not hard to see developers not spending time on GNU alternatives to non-free software if proprietary gratis software is increasing available, such as drivers. As Linux grows in popularity, I can see non-free software pushing on GNU software until all that is left is the kernel.

Ubuntu has already started providing user data to Amazon in exchange for cash. I wonder how long it will be before the same happens to Debian and Fedora; money is a great motivator. It's not like they can claim to be more ethical than Ubuntu when they ship non-free software with their distros. Stallman has already said that he doesn't consider the likes of Ubuntu, Fedora, and Debian to be any different than Microsoft or Apple because they operate counter to the spirit of the GNU. As such, he refuses to use any of them.

I'm not a naysayer though and I think Stallman is at least part nuts. I just wanted to share my thoughts. I just installed Elementary OS and I love it, non-free software and all!

 

[Red Squirrel]

Ubuntu has already started providing user data to Amazon

Woah wait, when did this happen? What kind of data? I had no idea about this. D: Does this affect the Ubuntu forks as well like Kubuntu?

 

[Anteaus]

Woah wait, when did this happen? What kind of data? I had no idea about this. D: Does this affect the Ubuntu forks as well like Kubuntu?

http://arstechnica.com/information-...ls-ubuntu-spyware-because-it-tracks-searches/

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ubuntu-spyware.html

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/03/ubuntu-make-amazon-product-results-opt-unity

It started in late 2012 and is still happening today with 14.04. Currently it defaults to on, so the user needs to turn it off after a clean install if they don't want their browsing data to be sent to amazon. Canonical says it will be Opt-In post 14.04, but there is no way to know if they will follow through. I personally don't believe Canonical is specifically malicious as they are doing the same as Microsoft and Apple; however, if goes against the spirit of GNU in that nothing should be recorded or transmitted without the expressed permission of the user.

It's obvious Canonical is trying to fast track Ubuntu into the commercial domain and finally become profitable (they are not as of yet).