Google Makes Linux Apps On Chrome OS Official

[pal666]

Nvidia drivers are a piece of work generally speaking. I certainly believe you that you had BSODs with them on Windows

you don't have to believe me, that was microsoft's statistics

bugs do happen, on any OS.

then you can't expect it to "Just. Work. Every. Single. Time."

The fact is that on Windows, your graphics drivers go the extra mile so that don't prevent your laptop from suspending/resuming, don't destroy your battery, once installed and stable, all apps run fine with them (you don't have nvidia games or amd games, just games), they don't break potentially after each OS upgrade and you don't have to spend hours digging through forums trying to find the cryptic kernel command line option to try to make them work.

you listed your fantasies, not fact

[pal666]

For as long as a dbus API is provided in addition to /etc/ and not INSTEAD of it, 99% of projects will simply ignore it because of the pervasive mentality of "no hard dependencies!".

i don't know, on what planet do you live, on my planet "no hard dependency on systemd" is like "no hard dependency on libc", only veteran unix admins can do that, everyone else just ignores them

SSH uses userland-based tty emulation on the client side so that would be completely unaffected. If you want an example, just consider that you can install an OpenSSH server on Windows and then ssh into it, when the NT kernel doesn't have tty (as far as I know, anyway).

However your example kind of makes my point: yes, being able to ssh into a desktop computer is useful, but as long as people will be more concerned about that than about the use cases of actual desktop users, we won't get anywhere.

there was some work to get rid of kernel tty layer, but id didn't went anywhere. maybe because people who need it most are just posting their wishes on forums instead of doing some work?

[ssokolow]

i don't know, on what planet do you live, on my planet "no hard dependency on systemd" is like "no hard dependency on libc", only veteran unix admins can do that, everyone else just ignores them

That depends. I always consider portability to be one of my primary goals when not addressing a Linux-specific problem, so "no hard dependency on systemd" is very much a thing for me.

For GUI creations, that generally means "Not my problem. Go poke the maintainer of Qt's QSettings class." (The lack of such a ready-made solution in PyGTK was part of what drove me to Qt back in the GTK+ 2.x era.)

Heck, in the name of portability, when I write a little utility or script replacement in Rust, I take advantage of how easy it is to compile against musl libc to make Linux builds so statically linked that they depend only on the Linux kernel ABI.

[jacob]

you don't have to believe me, that was microsoft's statistics

Fine. I just take your word for it. But like I said, it would be interesting to see how that compares to nvidia driver crashes on Linux.

then you can't expect it to "Just. Work. Every. Single. Time."

Why not? Individual Ethernet drivers may have bugs too, but they get fixed. The important part is that the expectation and aim of any driver developer is that the user should basically never worry about ethernet drivers, networking should (and does) Just Work. It doesn't work with some apps only, or it doesn't let you browse to some sites and not others, and you don't have to jump through hoops and spend hours on mailing lists and user groups trying to figure out how to make it work when it should be taken for granted. I don't see why graphics should be any different. Linux's plug-and-play support is generally awesome and almost always works better and more reliably than in Windows. Graphics are the last area where this doesn't apply, but unfortunately it's absolutely essential for a desktop.

you listed your fantasies, not fact

Which of my points specifically are fantasies, then?

[jacob]

i don't know, on what planet do you live, on my planet "no hard dependency on systemd" is like "no hard dependency on libc", only veteran unix admins can do that, everyone else just ignores them

You and I may be living on the same planet, but most of the Linux ecosystem hasn't even commenced reentry yet. You want to set a custom NTP server address? Edit /etc/systemd/timesyncd.conf. You need to enable/disable a package repository? Edit /etc/apt/sources.list.d/* manually. You need to set a system-wide HTTP proxy? Well... there isn't really any documented and predictable way to do this, except setting environment variables, the location and syntax of which depends on which one of the dozens shells in existence is installed, and let's not even start on the fact that any of the system-level tools may or may not in fact honor these variables. You need some basic SMTP capability on your desktop? You can't (unless you consider the idea of installing postfix and spending the next week editing its config files as an acceptable example "desktop" computing).

My point is that Linux won't take on the desktop until developers and distro managers learn that dumping the millionth config file with a random syntax somewhere and expecting users to edit it is just not good enough for a desktop.

there was some work to get rid of kernel tty layer, but id didn't went anywhere. maybe because people who need it most are just posting their wishes on forums instead of doing some work?

I'm not aware of any work to get rid of tty, only to move it from the kernel into systemd instead. Fundamentally that wouldn't change anything. It's like the config files: as long as it's there (in whatever form), many people just take it as a convenient excuse to be lazy and not do the right thing by ensuring that their app is user friendly (which means among other things graphical) in all its aspects including installation, configuration and error handling.

[Awesomeness]

chromeos is not "kde desktop" or "gnome desktop", but it is certainly both desktop and linux

And so is Samsung DeX. It has a Java-based userland but it runs the Linux kernel and is targeted at the desktop, even if starshipeleven does not believe it.

[makam]

(which means among other things graphical)

Actually there's a distro for that. It's SUSE. Try and use it's YAST GUI control panel.

And why would a normal user ever want to install an smtp server?
Everything above facebook+youtube+office is not normal user territory anymore. It is intermediate user territory.

Linux does not suck for advanced users nor normal users. It sucks for intermediate users. And I agree that that is something to be fixed, however, not at the expense of it's current userbase. Believe it or not some of us prefer text files over arcane GUIs that may or may not do what they say. Some of us prefer to be in control rather than on autopilot. And TBH the windows registry is a lot more confusing than /etc.

[jacob]

Actually there's a distro for that. It's SUSE. Try and use it's YAST GUI control panel.

I know YAST but that's not the point. Install a 3rd party app that is not anticipated by YAST and that's it, no YAST will help you. Having a graphical front-end to the morass of inconsistent, redundant, error-prone, unpredictable config files, no matter how good that front-end its, does not address the main problem that there is no documented, secure, single-point-of-entry mechanism to handle settings and configuration.

And why would a normal user ever want to install an smtp server?
Everything above facebook+youtube+office is not normal user territory anymore. It is intermediate user territory.

That's a typical Apple argument. Our system is too limited to do this therefore it's not a good feature and you don't really want it. A good desktop system should be able to handle all this and more, even if the typical gamer or SOHO user won't need it. How many Windows users actually use AD policies, for example?

Believe it or not some of us prefer text files over arcane GUIs that may or may not do what they say.

I don't think that anyone is calling for the GUIs to be arcane. In reality, Linux GUIs are often arcane precisely for the reason that the underlying system is text file-driven rather than API driven. There is basically no way in the universe to write a tool that will be able to reliably parse, modify and re-save the various config files in all circumstances and scenarios. When the underlying OS is a mess that half works, there is little chance for the GUI to be anything other than messy and half-work. That's why I say that we need to do away with the current status-quo, not build on top of it.

And TBH the windows registry is a lot more confusing than /etc.

No question about that. But that doesn't mean that /etc has any redeeming merit, it's like saying that a restaurant is actually good because you don't immediately die of food poisoning. The Windows Registry is a typical case where Microsoft had the right idea (they often do) but ruined it by a terrible execution (they often do that too).

[makam]

I know YAST but that's not the point. Install a 3rd party app that is not anticipated by YAST and that's it, no YAST will help you. Having a graphical front-end to the morass of inconsistent, redundant, error-prone, unpredictable config files, no matter how good that front-end its, does not address the main problem that there is no documented, secure, single-point-of-entry mechanism to handle settings and configuration.

I actually would not mind having a single-point-of-entry mechanism to handle settings and configuration... if it were a single large text file. The problem is that you can't pipe and script a GUI. Well you can with macros but then macros become your (security) issue. If we did indeed move to your idea, then we would have also the added burden of having to redevelop a billion small powershell alike cmdlets like it is done on Windows server(hint: it is not pretty).

That's a typical Apple argument. Our system is too limited to do this therefore it's not a good feature and you don't really want it.

That is not the Apple way, the Apple way is 'We don't want you to do this so we will do everything legal to prevent you from doing so.'.
The Linux way is ' Yes, do whatever you want, but after you did it you are RESPONSIBLE.' Freedom comes with RESPONSIBILITY. You can't have both freedom and spoon-feeding.
If you are doing things that are above and beyond a 'normal user' then don't pretend/lie to be a normal user because you are not one of them and claiming as such is irresponsible.

You(obviously not probably you, but I am using you as a figure of speech) may not have the knowledge right now, you may even be a child, but maybe you want to become a power user one day, and that is fine. I suggest you start here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_engineering

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_...s_and_colleges

I can tell you from experience that is is a long and arduous journey, but it is rewarding and totally worth it.

The Windows way is some weird amalgamation in between, but it is increasingly becoming similar with the Apple way.

And hey, why are you taking away my option to do everything with text files. Nobody is stopping you from rewriting all of GNU userland into a registry-alike database yet you want /etc to be killed, regardless of how many of us want it to remain. Perhaps some truly do prefer /etc.

I don't think that anyone is calling for the GUIs to be arcane. In reality, Linux GUIs are often arcane precisely for the reason that the underlying system is text file-driven rather than API driven. There is basically no way in the universe to write a tool that will be able to reliably parse, modify and re-save the various config files in all circumstances and scenarios. When the underlying OS is a mess that half works, there is little chance for the GUI to be anything other than messy and half-work. That's why I say that we need to do away with the current status-quo, not build on top of it.

I think you misunderstood. In my expereience Linux GUIs are less arcane than Windows ones. I sometimes don't even wan't the GUI to do parsing, just give me the full stack trace of the error or output.
In fact if I don't have a text output the 'control freak' inside of me won't trust any GUI. That is what I mean under arcane.
For example IMO this should be a criminal offence:
https://cdn.windowsreport.com/wp-con...g-happened.jpg
This is just as bad. It is basically telling me, there may or may not be progress on the task, but I just want to give you an illusion of progress:
https://conceptdraw.com/a2246c3/p47/...rt-example.png

How many Windows users actually use AD policies, for example?

Windows does not provide you with AD actually. Windows server provides you with AD. I know more gamers that use Linux than they use Windows server.
Also...

A good desktop system should be able to handle all this and more, even if the typical gamer or SOHO user won't need it.

Linux does that already. Just not in the way you would prefer it.

it's like saying that a restaurant is actually good because you don't immediately die of food poisoning

Setting your standards high,eh? /sarcasm :P

[ssokolow]

Why not? Individual Ethernet drivers may have bugs too, but they get fixed. The important part is that the expectation and aim of any driver developer is that the user should basically never worry about ethernet drivers, networking should (and does) Just Work. It doesn't work with some apps only, or it doesn't let you browse to some sites and not others, and you don't have to jump through hoops and spend hours on mailing lists and user groups trying to figure out how to make it work when it should be taken for granted. I don't see why graphics should be any different. Linux's plug-and-play support is generally awesome and almost always works better and more reliably than in Windows. Graphics are the last area where this doesn't apply, but unfortunately it's absolutely essential for a desktop.

Why not? Individual Ethernet drivers may have bugs too, but they get fixed. The important part is that the expectation and aim of any driver developer is that the user should basically never worry about ethernet drivers, networking should (and does) Just Work. It doesn't work with some apps only, or it doesn't let you browse to some sites and not others, and you don't have to jump through hoops and spend hours on mailing lists and user groups trying to figure out how to make it work when it should be taken for granted. I don't see why graphics should be any different. Linux's plug-and-play support is generally awesome and almost always works better and more reliably than in Windows. Graphics are the last area where this doesn't apply, but unfortunately it's absolutely essential for a desktop.

Because graphics are much more complicated than network drivers. They're half-way between network drivers, which push Ethernet frames, not having to care much about their contents, and Wine, which has to emulate a massively complex OS API.

As-is, OpenGL is a big, complex, stateful API. It's not wonder that different applications exercise it in different ways to trigger different bugs in divergent implementations.

If every driver were using Vulkan for everything and OpenGL were implemented as a single GL-on-Vulkan layer shared between all drivers (similar to how TCP/UDP/etc. and IP/IPX/etc. are implemented as layers on top of the network driver), then the world would be a better place and I'd agree with your expectations.