Originally posted by birdie
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What Are The Biggest Problems With Linux?
Collapse
X
-
Re
Originally posted by oliver View PostAs for your clicking and Kcalc comparison, I blame QT for being a behemoth. calculator under Ubuntu (thus gtk based) runs fast.
I don't like when people lie just because they hate on something(in this case KDE or/and Qt).
Comment
-
Originally posted by birdie View PostThe mentioned problems are getting fixed all the time the problem is that I see no end in sight. Besides, if something doesn't work in Linux, people won't f*cking care whose fault it is, "It works in Windows/MacOS/whatever - Linux sucks", and they are right.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Poliander View PostThe Linux ecosystem is far too shattered to build something that is able to compete with MacOS or Windows in terms of "general usability". Look at all those different desktop environments, window managers, package formats, audio and input subsystems, distributions with different look-and-feels, license and copyright implications and restrictions, unstable programming interfaces... I'm convinced that Linux would get far more support from end-users, software donators and hardware vendors if the whole thing wouldn't be so directionless, volatile and hostile.
(Of course, this diversity is also a kind of a strength. Most Linux users are well aware of those strenghts and know how to benfit from the freedom-of-choice. But these are the two sides of the same coin...)
Comment
-
Originally posted by RussianNeuroMancer View PostLink for people who not aware about birdie trolling: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...C-Vendor/page2
Comment
-
Originally posted by birdie View PostLinux constantly evolves? OMG. You even boast about that.
Windows evolves, but APIs and ABIs are rock solid. On Windows 8 I can run software written for ... Windows 3.1 which was released over 25 years ago. Try this feat with Linux software.
Worthless points? Great, go and convince a single company to port its applications from Windows to Linux. Whereas you are theorizing, I deal with big ISVs and I know what they want from Linux. But you are free not to agree with me, just forget about Linux having more than 3% on the desktop.
Comment
-
Originally posted by birdie View PostYep, that's the case. But given today's storage sizes, it's not a problem at all.
In Windows 7 64 under winsxs:
Total DLLs: 6828
Unique DLLs: 3604
Comment
-
Originally posted by elanthis View PostThis is amazing. Thank you for this link, it'll save me a lot of time explaining to people why we don't waste time porting games to Linux.
There's that, plus the complete lack of real QA. The Microsoft Azure QA team alone is larger than the entire developer and tester pool of X.org, Mesa, GTK, GNOME, and the DRI/DRM bits of the kernel. You would crap yourself if you had any idea of the size of the team responsible for just DirectX.
FOSS, for all the talk about it being open to anyone and having "millions of eyeballs," simply does not have a very large developer pool, and has an even smaller "support staff" pool. Real professionals with actual skill/talent are doing their work for pay. The good ones are doing it for a lot of pay. They do not have free time after working 40-60 hours/week to hack on a hobbyist OS or software, and even if they did they probably want to spend their non-working hours doing something other than slaving away on more software. Take that fact along with the fact that the largest FOSS companies have teeny tiny profits compared to even the run of the mill proprietary software companies (Red Hat's recent $1b _gross revenue_ is about the same as the _net profit_ of some of the smaller well-known software companies), and you have the cause for the practically barren developer pool on the important FOSS projects, and the reason why the folks working on those projects keep complaining about being so seriously under-manned.
Comment
-
Originally posted by elanthis View PostThe actual stats show that the only people leaving Windows are the people going to Macs. Of course, they also show that a lot of the hardcore Linux users of 1990's and early 2000's also moved to Macs. Linux was at 1% in 1999. It's at 1% now. Projecting historical evidence indicates that it'll still be at 1% in 2025.
Ignoring your bunch of bull it's enough to say OS X lives only, because of marketing. It's aiming at desktops since beginning and it's still very niche OS. MS succeeded, because there wasn't real competition in the first years and then they had monopoly. When good software will come to Linux then only idiots will use Windows. In 2025 there will be MS Linux.
I actually worked for a very large government installation for years, doing in-house software development and some light sysadmin work on the Linux server farm. This was back in my Linux fanboy days. It is actually one of the larger catalysts that caused me to turn from a "Linux is the future" proponent like yourself into a "Linux is a nice Web server OS, but thank God there's someone I can give money to in exchange for a less frustrating desktop experience" believer.
Government jobs will best illustrate for you just how great Windows is for idiots who can't tell their assholes from floppy drives and how awful Linux is for "idiots" who can't figure out how to read unified diff files generated by dpkg when foobar-1.7.2b changes config file compatibility with foobar-1.7.2a.Last edited by kraftman; 11 June 2012, 05:59 AM.
Comment
-
ATI & nVidia GFX driver is to my pov a big issue.
Beside that I'm using ArchLinux as my day to day office work and it's a great source of knowledge.
Whereelse can you find such a precise documentation like Kernel/Doc.txt, Manuals, Code sources for free.
Remember during the ms-dos age, you may have to buy books to understand psp, mcb, int 21h ...
Comment
Comment