How to help / support Linux ? - your idea's

[?John?]

Technical superiority is a matter of perspective and is relatively case based.

In most ways concerning the users Mac OSX and Ms Windows are vastly technically superior to linux.

Definitely. I keep saying that it's always a matter of respective user's perspective.
As an engineer I tend to emphasize what's hidden under the hood and the resulting real-world experience when evaluating technical superiority.
I don't want to go into much detail here as that would probably become grounds for further misunderstanding, but believe me that both me and those following suit can see a big difference (mostly for the better, otherwise they would be back in no time) after moving to Ubuntu.
Let me just say that GNU/Linux could use a complete overhaul of GUI subsystem (already being worked on and I'm really curious how Wayland pans out as KMS and Gallium3D already rock), much more standardization (for example userspace environment and unified package management - both in terms of package format and dependency structure) and Winblow$ should really get rid of registry, the tendency to have almost everything hardwired (including vital stuff) instead of being able to dynamically adapt to changing environment and most importantly trying to keep backwards compatibility at all cost, resulting in all sorts of dirty mess.

The question becomes, how do you want to define your argument. If the system has incapable users by and in large due to intellegence or lack of apptitude, it must adapt or it become inferior to other systems.

If I didn't make myself clear by now, adapting for the needs of incapable users more than what is healthy and reasonable (which is a very thin line to cross) is exactly what I'm so afraid of, because the system going down that road is bound to become a total disaster.
Whatever happens to GNU/Linux in the future, I really hope bringing more people aboard won't make it become just a free (as in price) replacement for MAC OS or Winblow$. That said, I'm always happy to see someone bringing over anything good and maybe even taking it a few steps further - for example I just love how Winblow$' GUI subsystem is able to switch GPUs or even fail and recover without the user even noticing and I can't wait to see that coming.

[Thatguy]

I tend to be rather pessimistic when it comes to trying to estimate the chances of correcting any flaws of human nature. The problem is obviously on both sides and all I'm trying to say is that I'd hate to see us screwing up technically superior solution to any problem just to make up for the incompetence of it's potential users.

that pyschology goes in both directions. Technical superiority is a matter of perspective and is relatively case based.

In most ways concerning the users Mac OSX and Ms Windows are vastly technically superior to linux.

The question becomes, how do you want to define your argument. If the system has incapable users by and in large due to intellegence or lack of apptitude, it must adapt or it become inferior to other systems.

Regardless of performance or liscensing arrangments.

[?John?]

I do not fully get the coincidence between stable drivers and open source drivers. I had several ati cards which had several problems with open source drivers. Even with open specs it does not mean that everything works.

That's because there isn't an easy one, since the quality of both blobs and libre drivers can be either perfect, crap or anything in between. The only thing that's even close to coincidence is that the blobs can by fixed and improved only by their creators and as their track record clearly indicates, they can be pretty reluctant to do so. On the other hand, open specs guarantee that it's possible to reach hardware's full potential, but only as long as there's someone able and willing to do the work - other than that it's always just a matter of time, which is actually what all these problems with libre software seem to be all about.

It is more a psychological aspect that somebody prefers open source.

That's right, as every opinion is a psychological phenomenon. But it still doesn't invalidate the fact, that this opinion is probably based on many perfectly valid reasons, so the real question is "Why do all these people prefer free and open code?"
Ask yourself if the hardware manufacturers can really be trusted to keep providing their customers with stable and secure drivers, able to make the most of their hardware (both efficiency and feature-wise), as long as they need and all things considered, the obvious answer seems to be "most likely not."
Take GPUs as a classic example:
Is AMD making sure that those who need it can keep using the last fglrx version working with R5?? and older GPUs? No.
Never mind - not every GPU manufacturer out there is doing the same. For example nVidia's blob for legacy hardware still works with latest kernels and X servers. But do they keep actually maintaining it (actively optimizing it, adding new features relevant to supported hardware and scanning the code for security)? If they say so, what makes you believe them (at least for stuff that isn't trivially visible to end users)? And even if they really do, how much longer are they gonna keep it up?
Remember the saying "If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself"? I believe it's based on a bunch of very good reasons, at least as far as my experience can tell.
Needless to say this problem is nothing specific just for GPUs, because various degrees of closed code breakage seems to be virtually ubiquitous throughout the ICT industry as firmware, blobs, operating systems and applications all tend to go completely haywire from time to time (definitely much more often than I consider acceptable).

Yup, that is pure truth especially as devices get more complex.

I hope it's now clear that things are a little more complicated than that, but the time requirements for getting things right (open or closed) definitely increase with device complexity.

Keep in mind that the developers job is to make the computer accesable to the users, not the other way around.

Most people don't know how to get to work if you ask them for directions, what makes you think we are going to fix the other bad habits they have. That is the key and fundemental difference between MS and Apple and most of the OS community.

I tend to be rather pessimistic when it comes to trying to estimate the chances of correcting any flaws of human nature. The problem is obviously on both sides and all I'm trying to say is that I'd hate to see us screwing up technically superior solution to any problem just to make up for the incompetence of it's potential users.

[Thatguy]

I completely agree. The real question is "What's the route cause of the problem (if the relatively small market share even is a problem)?"
I would like to get one thing straight though - we obviously disagree about this, but there's definitely no reason to insult each other. I was simply presenting my opinion on the matter and tried to support it with arguments based on the view from my own perspective. If you believe I have insulted you in any way in the process, then I'm really sorry, because I definitely didn't mean to. My opinions are never final before it's proven beyond any doubt that they're right and I'm more than happy to correct them accordingly when I'm presented with relevant evidence before that happens. I honestly believe you should start treating your opinions the same way instead of calling the thoughts of the others "diatribes of drivel" because it defeats the whole point of any discussion if you don't.
I believe there's no point in continuing this dialog unless you realize what I'm talking about and start treating other members of this forum with appropriate respect.

Keep in mind that the developers job is to make the computer accesable to the users, not the other way around.

Most people don't know how to get to work if you ask them for directions, what makes you think we are going to fix the other bad habits they have. That is the key and fundemental difference between MS and Apple and most of the OS community.

[deanjo]

I do not fully get the coincidence between stable drivers and open source drivers. I had several ati cards which had several problems with open source drivers. Even with open specs it does not mean that everything works. It is more a psychological aspect that somebody prefers open source.

Yup, that is pure truth especially as devices get more complex.

[?John?]

Let me ask this from your diatribe of drivel, has this worked for linux on the desktop and the end user ?

I think the marketshare speaks volumes.

I completely agree. The real question is "What's the route cause of the problem (if the relatively small market share even is a problem)?"
I would like to get one thing straight though - we obviously disagree about this, but there's definitely no reason to insult each other. I was simply presenting my opinion on the matter and tried to support it with arguments based on the view from my own perspective. If you believe I have insulted you in any way in the process, then I'm really sorry, because I definitely didn't mean to. My opinions are never final before it's proven beyond any doubt that they're right and I'm more than happy to correct them accordingly when I'm presented with relevant evidence before that happens. I honestly believe you should start treating your opinions the same way instead of calling the thoughts of the others "diatribes of drivel" because it defeats the whole point of any discussion if you don't.
I believe there's no point in continuing this dialog unless you realize what I'm talking about and start treating other members of this forum with appropriate respect.

[Thatguy]

Nope. It depends on their ability to get rid of bad habits and what they need from their computers.


Wrong again. Command shell is extremely flexible and powerful tool for experienced users and/or system administrators.
The thing is that (as renkin already noted) "lusers" don't want to deal with anything except for "just click me and all your problems shall magically go away" kind of utilities.


Now that's a whole different story. I agree that there are still quite a few cases where GUI may not be sufficiently developed and these should be addressed ASAP.


Same here. I was using Winblow$ for over a decade and the same thing goes for at least a dozen others who are all happy Ubuntu users now. Not that everything is perfect of course, but the fact that they haven't reverted itself means that it must be worth it and the benefits must outweigh all that they had to sacrifice.


Don't worry - never gonna happen as everyone is entitled to his own opinion and constructive criticism is always welcome.


I believe that enough diversity is always a good thing because diverse ecosystems are much more robust. That way almost everyone can get what suits him the best and it obviously seriously limits possible malware impact. Let's not resort to traditional proprietary "one size fits all" approach as that would almost certainly cause us more harm than good.


Let me reiterate: SCREW BINARY COMPATIBILITY! Completely tying your hands with backwards compatibility is a direct route to hell. Just have a look at what it did to X and Winblow$! If the so-called "application developers" are so lazy and incompetent that they can't deal with that, then I really believe we're much better off without them.


Do you realize that "installers" are actually pointless in systems with package management? That's what packages, package managers and repositories are for.
Now that's the bad habits I'm talking about - lusers expect that they need to download some crap from softpedia and lamelopers keep pushing out stupid installers instead of preparing packages and uploading them to distribution partner repositories.
If it wasn't for this, things would actually be much more convenient and more importantly, stuff would "just work".


Fast, reliable, lightweight. Now imagine using that on the desktop. The problem is, that it requires global paradigm shift - people willing to get rid of bad habits (libre drivers in the kernel, packages with applications in repositories and).


Exactly.


Again - that's exactly why I hate blobs (along with all related bullshit like stable interfaces) so much. And no - it's definitely not psychological as Kano suggested.


Stable interfaces for software (system calls) already exists and fortunately never will for drivers. Thank god that kernel developers aren't willing to stab themselves in the back like that.

Let me ask this from your diatribe of drivel, has this worked for linux on the desktop and the end user ?

I think the marketshare speaks volumes.

[?John?]

Got it!

You know what? I think I know why proprietary vendors hate GNU/Linux (and probably libre platforms in general) so much - because we're forcing them to actually work and take the responsibility for their results instead of letting them cobble something together once (and usually wrong) and then dumping it out there to bitrot!

[?John?]

Linux is a pain in the ass for most people.

Nope. It depends on their ability to get rid of bad habits and what they need from their computers.

terminal is a crutch for poorly written software period.

the average users doesn't want to deal with it.

Wrong again. Command shell is extremely flexible and powerful tool for experienced users and/or system administrators.
The thing is that (as renkin already noted) "lusers" don't want to deal with anything except for "just click me and all your problems shall magically go away" kind of utilities.

My beef with terminal is thats its often needed to do simple thing that should be GUI.

Now that's a whole different story. I agree that there are still quite a few cases where GUI may not be sufficiently developed and these should be addressed ASAP.

You may not likel hearing it but as a former windows udser and having done quiet a bit of tech support. Its what I hear about linux and its from first hand experiences.

Same here. I was using Winblow$ for over a decade and the same thing goes for at least a dozen others who are all happy Ubuntu users now. Not that everything is perfect of course, but the fact that they haven't reverted itself means that it must be worth it and the benefits must outweigh all that they had to sacrifice.

don't shoot the messenger.

Don't worry - never gonna happen as everyone is entitled to his own opinion and constructive criticism is always welcome.

I started using linux in 1998 it was actually far less fractured then. Its gotten to out of hand.

I believe that enough diversity is always a good thing because diverse ecosystems are much more robust. That way almost everyone can get what suits him the best and it obviously seriously limits possible malware impact. Let's not resort to traditional proprietary "one size fits all" approach as that would almost certainly cause us more harm than good.

Linux needs one really good solid API and they need to hold binary compatability. They need to get application developers on board or the boat is going no where.

Let me reiterate: SCREW BINARY COMPATIBILITY! Completely tying your hands with backwards compatibility is a direct route to hell. Just have a look at what it did to X and Winblow$! If the so-called "application developers" are so lazy and incompetent that they can't deal with that, then I really believe we're much better off without them.

it depends on the circumstance but there are situation where installer don't run etc etc etc and your only hope is terminal, Ubuntu has made alot of useability strides.

I don't want a command line OS. neither do alot of other people. Point click and go. until linux as a OS accomplishs this on the desktop, its doomed to be a no show on desktop.

Do you realize that "installers" are actually pointless in systems with package management? That's what packages, package managers and repositories are for.
Now that's the bad habits I'm talking about - lusers expect that they need to download some crap from softpedia and lamelopers keep pushing out stupid installers instead of preparing packages and uploading them to distribution partner repositories.
If it wasn't for this, things would actually be much more convenient and more importantly, stuff would "just work".

Its great for server though. My ubuntu howmeserver is a nice machine, always up, never crashs but its pretty stripped down.

I don't have a beef with linux, I am trying to exspress why it hasn't been a sucess on dekstop despite nearly 2 decades of development.

Fast, reliable, lightweight. Now imagine using that on the desktop. The problem is, that it requires global paradigm shift - people willing to get rid of bad habits (libre drivers in the kernel, packages with applications in repositories and).

Yes, you have huge choice with proprietary. The EULA is full of choices. Have fun.

Exactly.

Agreed. But do you know 90% of BSODs is because of bad written drivers? Closed source mind you. The situation is already good now - manufacturers *should* provide opensource drivers and kernel.org people can make them even more polished.

Again - that's exactly why I hate blobs (along with all related bullshit like stable interfaces) so much. And no - it's definitely not psychological as Kano suggested.

Maybe whats linux is missing is stable ABI for drivers and software. But this would mean requirement of ten versions of same infrastructure and bugs/exploits due to it. As well as written once, forgotten since - kind of binary blobs.

Stable interfaces for software (system calls) already exists and fortunately never will for drivers. Thank god that kernel developers aren't willing to stab themselves in the back like that.

[crazycheese]

I do not fully get the coincidence between stable drivers and open source drivers. I had several ati cards which had several problems with open source drivers. Even with open specs it does not mean that everything works. It is more a psychological aspect that somebody prefers open source. As long as fglrx was supported with those older rv410 or r300 cards i had xv worked, which became a major problem with newer cards and fglrx later. But full system crashes i only had while debugging xorg issues with binary hacks or when switched drivers - that's the point where ati 100% sucks...

No kano, its not psychological.
Proprietary is hidden insecure Pandora, which you cannot modify in any aspect(next-prev versions, card range, small bugs).
The hugest cons of proprietary is insecurity and limitation of your choices. Unless the master allows you to do so.

*stuff*

WinFF, try it