Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Are The Biggest Problems With Linux?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • In reference of this post.
    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
    Thanks for the info. Maybe Ubuntu will do something similar, but I think it will be better if they make more user friendly bug reporting tool, so issues will not be hidden like in Windows, but fixed.
    No need to look further. Fedora, one of largest Linux distributions, since its 11th release does have a similar Windows 7 method called ABRT (Automatic Bug Reporting Tool). Documentation is available in plain sight. I am amazed Canonical did not adopt that feature for their Ubuntu releases.
    Last edited by finalzone; 06-11-2012, 01:57 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by garegin View Post
      the stable API has high costs. that is library bloat. for one thing, only a monumental idiot would run an app that is not actively maintained. and besides, you can't count on backwards compatibility. quickbooks written in 2004 did not work for vista that came out in 2006. i think the osx's minimal approach to backwards compatibility is the best balance between "running 3.1 apps on windows 8" and constant breakage.
      Bloat is not a problem. Having a few hundred megabytes of libraries on a large HDD or SSD is really not so bad if it means you can run old and new programs.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
        The two overall biggest issues with linux IMO:

        1. Drivers. Yes, its gotten far better than it used to be, but hardware support under linux is still far from the ideal.
        Key reasons, hardware manufacturers themselves unwilling to provide documentation to write drivers. Some of them like Nvidia provides binary drivers. Try to run any bone stock Windows series including 7 and 8 system without using third parties drivers and come back comparing the hardware support. You will realize Linux kernel outclasses those from either Windows or OS X in term of support. The latter heavily relies on third-parties or heavily optimized on their specific chosen hardware.


        2. Fragmentation. Choice is one of the biggest strengths of linux, but also ends up being one of the biggest weaknesses. There seem to be too many pointless forks and/or duplication of work. (for a good example look at the video editor situation. New ones popping up constantly, no great ones).
        I saw "fragmentation" as a strength because of different needs from users themselves. Learn to proceed by elimination. At the end, three main distributions are left: Fedora/RHEL/SUSE/Mageia, Debian/Ubuntu/Mint and others. Other distributions are just the subset of these listed main one which likely help enhancing a better experience.

        Comment


        • Re

          Originally posted by plonoma View Post
          Bloat is not a problem. Having a few hundred megabytes of libraries on a large HDD or SSD is really not so bad if it means you can run old and new programs.
          Absolutely and totally agree! And I also don't see the problem of having more Development Frameworks(GTK, Qt), the specific components are loaded from HDD when needed and released when the application is closed anyway.
          I've read all the comments and a lot of people don't have any idea of how the market works, and that you should not block developers to use their favorite development platform to make for you great applications. "We should not use anything, we should be primitive and have only 1 standard" that's not possible, that's called evolution when a new option appears, you can't make 1 standard that will solve all the problems at once. Hardware evolves and the ecosystem changes and the initial standards(and not only) are by design not compatible with the new things.

          Comment


          • Re

            Originally posted by VinzC View Post
            While it relies upon noble principles (have more people discover GNU/Linux and make them compare it with other systems), the roots of GNU/Linux might fade away and dissolve into the mass effect because, IMHO, most people are interested in a machine that just works. They don't care about the philosophy behind. Nor do they care about choices and freedom. Nor do they care about learning their system. They don't care about their rights being limited or not being able to fully control their system. Bringing a GNU/Linux desktop to that user base is “dangerous” to me as it might result in being tainted with values that it was once against.

            These people should be educated (i.e. informed and convinced about the goods of it) prior to using our favourite system.
            Get over it people, what's with all this mind limitation. Every simple user should be a geek in order to use Linux and learn of the roots of it? Really? What's the point? There is no need in that stupid nonsense. If you like to learn of the roots it doesn't mean that all should do like you...
            I see A Lot of "Selfish" in here(in almost all the posts I mean). "I want a user to learn all about the roots. Oh, that grandpa should not use the internet on Linux, he has first to read the assembly code if it's there!", "I want all the distributions to use old, crappy technology cause I am so nostalgic", "I want Linux to not evolve cause I love the terminal and ugly and featureless stuff", "I don't give a sh** about programmers, I want all the distributions to use GTK and 1 standard for everything even if that standard is faulty by design for the current hardware and ecosystem and needs a replacement".

            Comment


            • Originally posted by kraftman View Post
              And that's Windows is damn vulnerable. It's not a mystery there are security holes from a DOS era! This makes your APIs and ABIs bunch of crap.
              To be fair, unlike Linux, Windows has been very hesitant to drop support for older parts of the OS and older API's. At the end of the day, Microsoft leaves implementation to the developer, rather then forcing it upon them.

              You're simply dumb. What's Linux missing are just games and some software. That's all. Games are coming and there's more and more software as well. Like I said before Valve proved you wrong.
              Remember the Source engine was designed with both OpenGL and Direct3d support? Makes porting a LOT easier then having to undergo a DX to OGL conversion.

              Note: The majority of the market uses Direct X.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by gamerk2 View Post
                To be fair, unlike Linux, Windows has been very hesitant to drop support for older parts of the OS and older API's. At the end of the day, Microsoft leaves implementation to the developer, rather then forcing it upon them..
                Biggest mistake is to think Linux as a whole. Next time, talk about a distribution. Debian/RHEL, with its conservative approach, still has older API parts.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by cyring View Post
                  Just refresh your mind that the popular Android jvm runs on top of Linux
                  Linux the kernel, yes. That has absolutely nothing to do with the larger GNU/Linux family of OSes, which is what people usually mean when they say "Linux."

                  Android has as much in common with desktop Linux as Firefox has in common with IE (they both use a couple popular FOSS libraries like SQLite internally, but 99% of the code is completely different).

                  Also, Android is not a jvm. It's an OS. Dalvik is the VM component of Android.

                  One of the first & may be the first OS used in the Internet servers.
                  Bullshit. The Internet was around and very successful long before Linus even started college. Probably safe to say it was around before your parents were even in high school, given how young I'd guess you to be.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                    Biggest mistake is to think Linux as a whole. Next time, talk about a distribution. Debian/RHEL, with its conservative approach, still has older API parts.
                    When the Kernel is re-worked to drop support for old(er) GPU's because its "difficult" or "expensive" to support 3 year old hardware, thats the kernel, not the distribution.

                    My advice: Work on creating an infrastructure that makes it trivial to support future hardware features in the future.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by plonoma View Post
                      As a developer:
                      I miss stable api's.
                      Good drivers
                      A lot of distribution specifics that form problems.
                      Lack of software delivery especially considering file formats and file system.
                      Concerning the file system < seriously people, learn to organize things better! (Gobolinux)
                      Here, a real developer which pretty much proves the second post of this thread. But people will argue that that list is BS, plain and simple.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by birdie View Post
                        Here, a real developer which pretty much proves the second post of this thread. But people will argue that that list is BS, plain and simple.
                        May it be possible that you repeatedly and in almost any thread post a link to this site just to generate traffic to make some money with the ads?

                        Comment


                        • One of the most annoying things for me when using Linux is the amount of stable kernels available. I remember when i started to use Linux there was two kernels to choose from. A stable (which was stable) and a development version.



                          So at the time this image was grabbed, there are9 (!?) stable kernels. Of those 9 only 3 have had fixes from mainline released 2012-06-09 backported. Where does this leave me as a user. Will my system blow up if i use a kernel which have not yet had fixes backported? Will there be security issues? Will i suffer performance hits?

                          My problem really started buying a usb 3 device. My distribution (gentoo) has 3.2.12 marked as stable. Pretty quick i realized that this will not run usb3 very well: WARN: Stalled endpoint were being thrown too dmesg and too logs. Then tried 3.2.17 (which at the time was marked stable) same problem but fewer entries. Then a change to kernel 3.3.6 which actually solved the problem. So we have two kernels both marked stable with different core functionally. To make things even worse it would seem that distributions have their own maintained kernels which could include fixes not apparent to the average user. E.g usb 3.0 will work on Ubuntu 3.0.

                          I have no clue on how to solve this. Perhaps cut down the number of stable kernels would allow easier maintenance so important driver fixes to be backported. The current method is confusing at least me and perhaps others?

                          Best Regards

                          Comment


                          • They're so many stable versions cause company still using them in the industry old software is used until all works and until they get support. The 2 and 3rd Kernel is used on regular desktop systems: 2nd for distrubtions that making a new release and are in are not in feature freeze while a new stable is released and distrubtions that are rolling release.
                            The 3rd is for distrubtions that are already released and get only bug fix updates. The 4rd and 5th kernel is used by distrubtions with longer life circle: LTS or Enterprise distrubtions.
                            All kernel versions 2.6.x are only to support old distrubtions that are used with pcs like industry computers or pcs from the goverment. For example in year 2010 i had a work experience in Dortmunder Systemhaus ( the IT Part of the township from Dortmund) and they had still Suse Linux 9 or even 8 on their Servers.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by soehest View Post
                              I have no clue on how to solve this. Perhaps cut down the number of stable kernels would allow easier maintenance so important driver fixes to be backported. The current method is confusing at least me and perhaps others?

                              Best Regards
                              That's what the change logs are for. I do think they are difficult to understand at times. Personally I would like a MMORPG style change log, so that each patch or upgrade shows how it was changed over time. This would spur on understanding and appreciation of the coders.

                              Comment


                              • If you're not creating your own distro or have customers with specific kernel version the only interesting part on that page for you is this:

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X