Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Are The Biggest Problems With Linux?

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

  • #71
    Originally posted by vertexSymphony View Post
    Disabled by default (man nouveau), add this option to you xorg.conf(.d):

    Code:
    Option "GLXVBlank" "true"
    Ah that reminds me...
    No method of graphically changing the options for the graphics cards. Having to ask on forums what options there are, and how to enable them are BS.

    Comment


    • #72
      That platform needs to be monetizable for it to really take off on the desktop. E.g., Android in the mobile space.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by birdie View Post
        Yep, that's the case. But given today's storage sizes, it's not a problem at all.
        My point wasn't the storage size but the fact that Microsoft breaks API/ABI compatibilities the same way that is done in "open source world". They just maintain the old versions for just about forever. I doubt that there's anything stopping from you doing that in Linux; it's just that it doesn't make any sense nor is there any intrest of doing that because open source software is easy to port to the newer APIs.

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by Teho View Post
          My point wasn't the storage size but the fact that Microsoft breaks API/ABI compatibilities the same way that is done in "open source world". They just maintain the old versions for just about forever. I doubt that there's anything stopping from you doing that in Linux; it's just that it doesn't make any sense nor is there any intrest of doing that because open source software is easy to port to the newer APIs.
          When maintained of course.... Otherwise, it just becomes a wreck.

          Comment


          • #75
            Originally posted by Teho View Post
            My point wasn't the storage size but the fact that Microsoft breaks API/ABI compatibilities the same way that is done in "open source world". They just maintain the old versions for just about forever. I doubt that there's anything stopping from you doing that in Linux; it's just that it doesn't make any sense nor is there any intrest of doing that because open source software is easy to port to the newer APIs.
            Unfortunately it's not as easy as it sounds. As a package maintainer and distro creator I have to say that even for open source software it's an awfully tedious and difficult process - Microsoft have resources for that.

            Comment


            • #76
              Originally posted by birdie View Post
              Unfortunately it's not as easy as it sounds. As a package maintainer and distro creator I have to say that even for open source software it's an awfully tedious and difficult process - Microsoft have resources for that.
              Who care about Microsoft. Simply make the features needed if they aren't there or unsuitable in Linux. Example add a module to an IDE to update the various repositories or build types.

              I will never be using Microsoft again.

              Comment


              • #77
                the stable API has high costs. that is library bloat. for one thing, only a monumental idiot would run an app that is not actively maintained. and besides, you can't count on backwards compatibility. quickbooks written in 2004 did not work for vista that came out in 2006. i think the osx's minimal approach to backwards compatibility is the best balance between "running 3.1 apps on windows 8" and constant breakage.

                Comment


                • #78
                  Originally posted by Jebril View Post
                  Stability not in terms of the kernel but in software, desktop environments and so on is very important and something that is very shaky with the Linux distributions. GRUB is also a pain in the ass, too many things can go wrong with it too easily, it needs to be more secure to editing in both Linux AND Windows.

                  Lack of support for drivers is another big thing as well as lack of support for general mainstream software. These arise for a self fulfilling cycle really, many people don't want to join in the Linux ranks because of these issues and thus developers and companies refuse to develop for Linux because they see it as a wasted investment.

                  So for me the two biggest things are stability and support.

                  The innovation is definitely there though and it's the thing that I love the most about Linux.
                  So both points are Companies the Problem, because instability of X-server is when that is happening most of the time in 99% of the time a problem of binary driver blobs from Nvidia and AMD. And that no "mainstream Software" is under linux availible can also only the companys that make this software change nobody else.

                  The only point who isnt about big companys faults was the point about GRUB, so Microsoft does it here worse, 1. they overwrite without questioning your old grub 2. they have not even a windows-only tool where you are able to add linux to their boot loader. So its unfair to say here are some linux-ONLY problems even if they do more than microsoft does.

                  And btw when you try to make a simple Linux installation like you would do in windows install it to a normal partition with the standard-fs, I dont see that much can happen, if you start to use magic like hell with lvm btrfs etc softwareraid, yes then something can go wrong. But some of this are also made by big companies, as exmaple the new efi-shit with its secure boot etc.
                  Last edited by blackiwid; 06-10-2012, 05:48 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by garegin View Post
                    the stable API has high costs. that is library bloat. for one thing, only a monumental idiot would run an app that is not actively maintained. and besides, you can't count on backwards compatibility. quickbooks written in 2004 did not work for vista that came out in 2006. i think the osx's minimal approach to backwards compatibility is the best balance between "running 3.1 apps on windows 8" and constant breakage.
                    One flaw of Linux is that such a small portion of the software that is available is actually actively maintained. A lot of the niche applications (which for some people are the very reason that they run Linux) are quite poorly maintained.

                    In that case, people have no choice but to run unmaintained software.

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                      For me it is that open source graphics device drivers are not so good as the proprietary ones; games don't work well, and too slow to watch 1080p (or even 720p) videos on YouTube.
                      The same applied to any operating system that come with bundled driver non optimized for gaming. Microsoft Windows system heavily depends from vendors to be fully operational. OS X is specific to hardware optimized by Apple.

                      And Ubuntu was the cool kid on the block but now is grandma.
                      Before Ubuntu, there were SuSE, Mandrake/Mandriva, Mepis or other distribution specialized in desktop.

                      * New release of GIMP or PHP comes out, and I have to wait 6 fucking months? What the hell? On Windows I can get it on same day!
                      From which distribution? Gimp history is documented, the reason why it took so long is due to GEGL.

                      * No cool new fancy software. Cinnamon, BeatBox, etc all latest software is nowhere to be found.
                      If you ask a gamer, its because Linux have no games and AMD drivers are shoddy.
                      Do you mean mainstream games like Call of Duty? That is specific to publishers themselves.

                      If you ask a laptop user, its because issues with power management, ACPI, hibernation, etc. No GPU switching between integrated and discreet graphics card.
                      That is depending on vendors themselves and companies like Microsoft interfering in hardware specification.

                      If you ask a professional user, there is no professional video editor, no professional graphics editor, no professional CAD software, etc.
                      Linux have very much software that is great, much that is great for consumers. But it often cant compete against commercial software by huge vendors when it comes to some software.
                      Those listed software are available for profession like Ardour, Blender. CAD is more complicated due to political matters rather than technical.

                      If you ask a software developer company, its the fragmentation and tons of different Linux distributions to deploy to.
                      Proceeding by elimination, two main SDK available: GTK and QT. Each can be written in addition of other programming language from C to Python via Ruby.

                      If you ask some company, its probably something to do with Active Directory, Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint or something like that.
                      Open-Xchange, Zimbra, 389 Directory (formely Fedora Directory Server).


                      Key points are research.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X