Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OS Battle: Linux Takes 1.7% Desktop Marketshare

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by jimbohale View Post
    Oh, I'm sorry, are those big render studios comprised of the vast majority of the population? Even assuming that was true (not saying it's not, but I don't assume things).
    Get off your anger trip. Nobody is interested in reading a tantrum.

    You actually do assume things. You already assumed one would need a keyboard to use Linux and one would have to enter commands. You do not. Fact is that most distros run out-of-the-box with just the mouse and only require you to enter something into the keyboard during their first installation. In Windows do you also need to enter your user name, your domain and license code, if it was not done already by an administrator for you. When this is too much effort then you are confusing the computer with the TV. And I would not blame you for it. Many people do only want to consume content and do not want to produce anything. Still, computers do come with keyboards and even your mobile phone tries to emulate a keyboard just so you can type messages in. Computers simply are meant to be used with keyboards. To make your first visit to a porn site before you can bookmark it do you also need to type the site's address in. You may only be more used to do the later and so have stopped noticing it.

    Oh, also some people get angry with their mouse and their TV remote control, too. So you fit right in. At least you used your keyboard to vent your anger with words and did not do it like this guy did:


    So "Bravo!" to you for not hitting your monitor with the keyboard. Or perhaps not, because what this guy did took balls.

    When you are having difficulties reading text on your screen and it gives you "puppy eyes" then you may need glasses. Even when you think you can read a text can glasses help you a lot when you have to work many hours at a monitor. Especially when you think you need a lot of spacing between letters should you seek help.

    Bugs on the other hand are normal. Software has got bugs and you need to accept it. Just like people have flaws. If you cannot accept it then stay away. What is more dangerous are viruses, spyware, trojans and bots. You get these more easily with Windows than with Linux. Porn sites make this worse so I have heard.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by sdack View Post
      Get off your anger trip. Nobody is interested in reading a tantrum.

      You actually do assume things. You already assumed one would need a keyboard to use Linux and one would have to enter commands. You do not.
      He is correct, because he means "configuring". Linux lacks integraged, flexible, smart, productive configuration tool - one which would be hard to produce given the recent tendency to create smaller individual configuration applications.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by brosis View Post
        He is correct, because he means "configuring". Linux lacks integraged, flexible, smart, productive configuration tool - one which would be hard to produce given the recent tendency to create smaller individual configuration applications.
        No, you two are doing something wrong. My Debian comes with a graphical installer and besides entering my name did I not have to configure anything. It finds the network, finds the router, connects to the Internet, downloads all basic packages and from there installs itself to a fully working desktop.

        The little one can tweak in Windows is not actually worth tweaking. Not for most users anyway. It is the same for Linux. One can do more, especially in Linux and go as far as editing configuration files, but this is a bonus and not a malus. It is not like Window's regedit, which sometimes offers some of the best tweaks, is really a great tool, or finding and editing .ini files.

        If your problem is with applications then just look for a menu entry like "Options", "Preferences" or "Setting". Linux is not different from Windows.

        It is possible you two think that you need to finger around with all settings and thus find yourself more often going through files on Linux than on Windows, but this is your own fault. You are likely too shy to mess around with the Windows registry. Again, I could not blame you here. Linux is far more better documented even on stuff on the lowest levels than Windows is. I hate messing around in the registry, too.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by sdack View Post
          Linux is far more better documented even on stuff on the lowest levels than Windows is.
          Documented for the public. I bet Microsoft has got lots of internal documentation (maybe they even let some of their partners look in it). Not that that makes a huge difference for the average developer.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by hadrons123 View Post
            To me it looks like Linux users are not getting laid since they are fiddling with computers most of the time and have to resort only to pornhub.
            Getting laid by ugly or fat women doesn't count.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by CrystalGamma View Post
              Documented for the public. I bet Microsoft has got lots of internal documentation (maybe they even let some of their partners look in it). Not that that makes a huge difference for the average developer.
              For Microsoft's own software is there a lot of documentation available through their knowledge base, but it is not all Microsoft and finding out what the registry settings of a non-M$ application do is often impossible. The worst case for Linux means to look at the source code. Considering all worst cases do I actually like reading through source code, because it answers all questions one can ever have about a software.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by brosis View Post
                He is correct, because he means "configuring". Linux lacks integraged, flexible, smart, productive configuration tool - one which would be hard to produce given the recent tendency to create smaller individual configuration applications.
                system-config-* and YaST, whatever Mandriva/Mageia's tool was called...

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  ... Linux is not different from Windows. ...
                  ???
                  You have Windows Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and the servers. Maybe Service Packs too.
                  How many Linux distributions are there? How many desktop environments are there?

                  If you have to support Windows, there are only a few options. :-)
                  If you have to support Linux, there are hundreds. :-(

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    http://io9.com/this-rare-peek-at-pixars-animation-system-is-computer-1557933361

                    Originally posted by jimbohale View Post
                    Oh, I'm sorry, are those big render studios comprised of the vast majority of the population? Even assuming that was true (not saying it's not, but I don't assume things).
                    My point was that Linux is a better fit for creatives/devs than the average user (like gnome has been targeting). As you said, there are too many niggles for normal users to deal with (even though the f.N workstation initiative should go some distance in helping in this area, but that's going to take several years).
                    Regarding the animation studios, you can Google for it. Iirc, DreamWorks and Pixar both use gnome desktops.
                    Checkout the desktop in the title.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by drSeehas View Post
                      ???
                      You have Windows Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 and the servers. Maybe Service Packs too.
                      How many Linux distributions are there? How many desktop environments are there?

                      If you have to support Windows, there are only a few options. :-)
                      If you have to support Linux, there are hundreds. :-(
                      Go and inform yourself how it is done under Linux. When you first have to ask then you only do not know. I suggest you look up "Linux Standard Base" and the two major package formats rpm and deb. And do not forget that for Windows it has "Home", "OEM", "Professional", "Small Business", "Enterprise" and "Sellakidney" versions, which you can support. You do not have to, but then you do not have to support all Linux distros, right?

                      Anyway, it is getting away from the original comment and it feels like I have to get me a chainsaw. You know the feeling, when you are standing on a hill and the stream of zombies coming at you seems endless? That kind of feeling.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by sdack View Post
                        Go and inform yourself how it is done under Linux. When you first have to ask then you only do not know. I suggest you look up "Linux Standard Base"
                        in a way, LSB is a joke... the fact it exists as a specification doesnt at all mean that an arbitrary release (name one) of an arbitrary distribution (name one) automatically is LSB certified, or compliant (in fact last i checked LSB compliant distribution counted on one hand's fingers)
                        even less does it mean that it would constitute the native configuration and API/ABI for said distribution (in fact even for distribution implementing LSB, it usually is an addon environment with an additional set of libraries and an auxiliary linker to coexist with the distribution's native ones)
                        and the two major package formats rpm and deb.
                        package formats are just containers for executable programs and metadata (dependency lists)
                        neither one accounts for platform specifics the program will have to face at runtime (from api's to the the lowliest detail, say a binary environment flag) so they dont guarantee compatibility between distributions (even of the same family)
                        And do not forget that for Windows it has "Home", "OEM", "Professional", "Small Business", "Enterprise" and "Sellakidney" versions, which you can support.
                        and do not forget that the versions of a single windows release are differentiated based on user facing functionality for the most part
                        since if you develop a normal application you usually target system-, or installable framework- supported APi's rather than "versions" or specific "features" (except maybe in the case of a specialized / administrative tool intended to interact with one - say, an AD console) for intents and purposes of application deployment they can be considered one thing
                        You do not have to, but then you do not have to support all Linux distros, right?
                        except that if your market is windows you can cover it all with as low as one codebase / code path (in the case of a .net application) or at most a couple or three (DX9/DX11, or pre/post vista as far as certain other api's - say, directwrite, or xaudio, are concerned, or...)
                        while if your market is linux you'll have to support all distributions (apart maybe from exotic niche-in-the-niche ones) not to miss on relevant slices of linux' desktop share - and you have to support at least major ones individually (now, it wont probably take N times the whole codebase, but specific if's or#ifdef's will be needed at very least )
                        Last edited by silix; 09-01-2014, 05:14 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Zombie silix View Post
                          in a way, LSB is a joke... the fact it exists as a specification doesnt at all mean that an arbitrary release (name one) of an arbitrary distribution (name one) automatically is LSB certified, or compliant (in fact last i checked LSB compliant distribution counted on one hand's fingers)
                          even less does it mean that it would constitute the native configuration and API/ABI for said distribution (in fact even for distribution implementing LSB, it usually is an addon environment with an additional set of libraries and an auxiliary linker to coexist with the distribution's native ones)
                          package formats are just containers for executable programs and metadata (dependency lists)
                          neither one accounts for platform specifics the program will have to face at runtime (from api's to the the lowliest detail, say a binary environment flag) so they dont guarantee compatibility between distributions (even of the same family)
                          and do not forget that the versions of a single windows release are differentiated based on user facing functionality for the most part
                          since if you develop a normal application you usually target system-, or installable framework- supported APi's rather than "versions" or specific "features" (except maybe in the case of a specialized / administrative tool intended to interact with one - say, an AD console) for intents and purposes of application deployment they can be considered one thing
                          except that if your market is windows you can cover it all with as low as one codebase / code path (in the case of a .net application) or at most a couple or three (DX9/DX11, or pre/post vista as far as certain other api's - say, directwrite, or xaudio, are concerned, or...)
                          while if your market is linux you'll have to support all distributions (apart maybe from exotic niche-in-the-niche ones) not to miss on relevant slices of linux' desktop share - and you have to support at least major ones individually (now, it wont probably take N times the whole codebase, but specific if's or#ifdef's will be needed at very least )
                          No. Only because you fail at doing it right does not imply everyone else has to fail, too. You seem to know about dependencies, but do not actually understand their purpose and rather choose to fail and to fall into a believe that it would be much simpler in Windows, as if Windows had only a single DLL and a single service that never changed. Seems like you never had to download any libraries from Microsoft, and in the right order, to get a software working. I even bet that when you download an update to DirectX you do not see it as fulfilling dependencies, but as a blissful act almost religious in nature. Just because Windows and closed source in general has successfully kept all the details away from you does not mean it is simpler. It only means they have kept you dumb. And with Linux, where you are given the chance to learn do you fail. It is actually quite sad, but I think the joke is on you. Go around to see your colleagues, friends and family members, help them with their Windows boxes and you get to see the true world of Windows. Every second Windows box pops up a message complaining about a missing DLL, a corrupted file, or the screen flickers and some software fails to start. They have accepted it and do not see it any more just like you. You are like them and the only difference is that you also fail at Linux, too. #zombies
                          Last edited by sdack; 09-03-2014, 04:42 AM.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X