Running Wayland: It Works, But A Lot Of Work Remains

[johnc]

If you're just going bleeding edge, ALL THE TIME, prepare for the problems. For everyone else, there's LTS distros.

Isn't Ubuntu 12.04 an LTS release?

[kazetsukai]

Another example, we had compiz 0.8 written in C. The developer rewritten it for C++. Of course, for a couple of versions it's shit (12.04 being a shitty standout). What was so wrong about keeping it in C and improving it from there? It was 95% ok, but nooooo we have to start again...

...You're not a developer, are you (then why the hell are you questioning their design decisions?) Sometimes, the rats nest gets too deep, the spaghetti too entwined, the hair too tangled to really sort everything out, and your project SCREAMS for simplification. This is when a developer cuts his losses, looks hard at the lessons he has learned and starts anew.

Linux could take over a larger marketshare, but the devs jump to do a thing that already worked from scratch, they get all the media attention(ohhh look wayland, I'm cumming!), and it's never good enough for the real market.

This problem isn't really what is holding Linux back. When KDE 4 rolled around, KDE3 still existed. Gnome2 still exists. Currently well supported software still exists in the Linux world, and that software is often getting bugfixes for a while. Use cases have changed, hardware has advanced, and X has needed this refresh for at least 10 years now.

And when they'll release it we won't see an improvement, in fact most likely we will have problems...and then we will start from scratch once again, this time we'll do it right!

When I started using KDE4 it was the earliest 4.0 releases. Lets give you a little context: I used 5 or 6 monitors at the time, and KDE4 didn't support TWO X screens, let alone 6, until well into KDE 4.5. I was hanging in there for years, banging on the door, submitting bugs, etc.... it drove me NUTS. But, meanwhile, somewhere else in the world... someone was still using KDE 3 the entire time, and didn't have those problems or the frustration. They happily used KDE 3 beyond its EOL. I bet there are people that STILL use KDE 3 out there.

You don't have to upgrade. Its a choice, one you make based on educated decisions (hopefully). If you're just going bleeding edge, ALL THE TIME, prepare for the problems. For everyone else, there's LTS distros.

[johnc]

I keep coming back here despite getting no value out of the experience and having relatively little impact in getting people to actually improve things that need improving, so yes, I apparently like it quite rough indeed. :/

Don't worry... I like you. And isn't that all that really matters?

Why the hell would I try to get people to switch to Linux? I'm not an evangelist. If they find out for themself and/or ask me about it, I'll gladly help them.

I guess there's a sense that if Linux had a broader user base, more software would be available for the platform. E.g., I kinda still need to hold on to Windows to play some games. So there is a certain side benefit if desktop Linux were to become more mainstream.

[kazetsukai]

Ancurio
Also, no one is saying Linux is "easy or just works", no one except for zealots maybe. Often it just works, sometimes it doesn't.
And I'm really sorry that you've been "misguided" by zealots into using Linux. But there's just no point in marketing it as something it isn't,
so you shouldn't either.

When you've done your homework and purchased well known, supported hardware, Linux is easy, and yes it does just work. Linux installers have, for a long period of time, been far superior to the Windows installers for one reason: Human beings had to actually install it to use it.

It doesn't take alot of effort to check the support status of hardware on Linux, and even less time to setup a system once you have a good baseline. But guess what, for the average user this doesn't help one bit.

OEMs could much easier do this work themselves, delivering well tested Linux installations with supported hardware to the masses. One thing I think Valve is going to teach us is how to reasonably do package management on a per-user level (thus, not requiring root)... and hopefully, someone will pick up the torch and implement a similar FOSS solution on all major distributions.

That's the missing piece, people. We need one /home level package manager to rule them all, and then all of the problems for OEMs basically disappear, and Linux JUST WORKS on the hardware it has been tested on.

By the way, I fucking hate PulseAudio, and don't use it. DMix does the job, (contrary to what alot of know-nothings that lurk around here say). For my uses it works, and more transparently than PA. Don't blame the applications, eg: "They use PA as/via ALSA (emulation) so they suck", they're just expecting ALSA, and PA's ALSA emulation isn't perfect. This horse has been beaten to death, then to a pulp, then to a blood pile, and now almost to DUST. People obviously have problems with it or they wouldn't complain... just like people obviously have had success with it or they wouldn't use it. I still install it from time to time to see if the status quo has changed.

Really though, enough of the personal attacks. It doesn't add anything, and just brings you to a lower status than the people you're bashing.

[Ancurio]

yeah, next time when you try to get someone to use linux tell them if it doesn't work well it's community effort so get to work bitch!

So what if I don't pay them? I still have a right to complain? WTF is this attitude? If I see a bug I report it. That is complaining. And it's good. That's how we improve. Sometimes it's easier to tell the developer what I don't like so he can fix it instead of me reading tons of code and fixing his bugs. Why do I have to act as if everything is perfect when it isn't? I am sick of people saying that linux is easy or that it just works.

Why the hell would I try to get people to switch to Linux? I'm not an evangelist. If they find out for themself and/or ask me about it, I'll gladly help them.
Yes, you have a right to complain, just as you have the right to be an ahole. The thing is, no one listens to aholes. Your pointless ranting on Phoronix forums
has exactly 0% effect on the development of the software in question. Reporting bugs is good. Yelling at people because they don't use up
their free time to fix them instead of earning money is just being an asshole.

Also, no one is saying Linux is "easy or just works", no one except for zealots maybe. Often it just works, sometimes it doesn't.
And I'm really sorry that you've been "misguided" by zealots into using Linux. But there's just no point in marketing it as something it isn't,
so you shouldn't either.

[daniels]

I keep coming back here despite getting no value out of the experience

phoronix forums stockholm syndrome ...

[Ancurio]

Amen brother! Looks like people above only talk about linux don't actually use it. When was the last time they pushed a new technology out there and it just worked? Seriously, it's more like, whenever I hear some enthusiastic idiots saying they'll release some new stuff I'm thinking here goes anothere 2 hours-2 days of fixing broken crap! It's never rock solid. It never: just works!

Seriously GTFO outta this place and use some other OS. I'm so sick of your shit.
FOSS is and always will be community effort, which means if something doesn't work out,
you don't complain to people you didn't pay, no, you help out yourself.

[elanthis]

Yeah, that's likely the reason; if the OS is tailored to the computer, it tends to work better.
Another reason preinstalled Linux computers would be very convenient if they were more prevalent.

You weren't around for the early days of the PC, were you?

[elanthis]

but you like it rough...?

I keep coming back here despite getting no value out of the experience and having relatively little impact in getting people to actually improve things that need improving, so yes, I apparently like it quite rough indeed. :/

[Mystro256]

One of the main points of Arch is that it doesn't include a default (enforced) setup including some fresh software that might annoy some users. With Arch you're free to build your distro however you want from scratch, so I'd not say Fedora is as vanilla as Arch is.

Yeah, that's likely the reason; if the OS is tailored to the computer, it tends to work better.
Another reason preinstalled Linux computers would be very convenient if they were more prevalent.