Why Desktop Linux Sucks and What We can Do About It

[deanjo]

Yes, Linux just allows people to do what they want with it - run hardware on experimental drivers, modify any part of it, compile their own kernels and that's why people report many issues.

As does every other OS allow experimental drivers to be used (exception being newer 64-bit flavors of windows where signing is required).

[kraftman]

As does every other OS allow experimental drivers to be used (exception being newer 64-bit flavors of windows where signing is required).

Of course probably every OS allows you to use experimental drivers, but not every OS (or 3rd party driver devs) public those experimental/alpha/pre-alpha state drivers. In Linux, you usually have opportunity to test very first bits of such drivers. I bet you know what I meant, but you specially wrote about other case.

[deanjo]

What would be the point? It would be unuseable. However, you do have the option of a minimal installation - so that HW is still supported.

How does a minimal install provide a working desktop? That is what the video is talking about.

Another great example that suffers from regressions all to often and breaks frequently is the intel HDA. Sit in #alsa for a few days, you will see what I mean.

[deanjo]

Of course probably every OS allows you to use experimental drivers, but not every OS (or 3rd party driver devs) public those experimental/alpha/pre-alpha state drivers. In Linux, you usually have opportunity to test very first bits of such drivers. I bet you know what I meant, but you specially wrote about other case.

There are plenty of drivers that being currently developed for linux that are not yet public. Again that happens across all OS's and the efforts that are going opensource usually have svn repositories that allow you to try out the cutting edge as well. beta's and alpha's drivers open or closed are no strangers to windows or os x.

[kraftman]

There are plenty of drivers that being currently developed for linux that are not yet public. Again that happens across all OS's and the efforts that are going opensource usually have svn repositories that allow you to try out the cutting edge as well. beta's and alpha's drivers open or closed are no strangers to windows or os x.

But there's far more Linux experimental drivers available for public then Windows or OS X drivers.

[deanjo]

But there's far more Linux experimental drivers available for public then Windows or OS X drivers.

Sure that's because most are satisfied with the drivers they have now. Where the linux drivers in many cases offer basic functionality and hopefully eventually mature into full featured ones.

[kraftman]

Sure that's because most are satisfied with the drivers they have now. Where the linux drivers in many cases offer basic functionality and hopefully eventually mature into full featured ones.

That's when comes to Macs not when comes to hackintoshes. People using preinstalled Linux distros are probably satisfied in same way. When comes to hackintoshes Linux offers far more and far better support for hardware.

[Silver Knight]

Why PulseAudio Sucks and there's really nothing we can do about it.

I had a long rant all planned, but after thinking about it a bit I have decided that it would be entirely pointless. Most major distros have decided that PulseAudio is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and no amount of complaining about it will change that, and all the bug reports in the world aren't going to make this particular situation go away, as I have discovered after suffering with PulseAudio related audio problems for more than a year now.

Suffice it to say that for a very long time ALSA worked flawlessly for me, then along came PulseAudio and sure enough, a boatload of problems along with it. For example, I was only able to watch about one third of this video before PulseAudio crashed on me, making it impossible to watch the rest of it. (This is just one of literally hundreds of such audio related annoyances I've faced since PulseAudio replaced the previously reliable ALSA which I was using natively prior to PulseAudio being forced down my throat.)

ALSA was great. Worked like a charm. Why exactly must we be FORCED to suffer with PulseAudio? Is there any reason why it can't be optional, like KDE3's ARTS sound server was? At least I was able to completely 100% disable ARTS and use ALSA exclusively and directly, without interference from some crazy sound daemon / audio server thing.

I cannot say that Linux sucks, because it really doesn't. At least not for me it doesn't... Linux has been absolutely the OS I've needed it to be for years now. It's been stable and reliable and performs well on all the hardware I've owned. I've only had occasional troubles, and most of those issues I brought upon myself by testing outside the bounds of normal software (upgrading to pre-release or testing releases of distros or packages, etc.), or were brought on by hardware failure (no fault of the OS).

What DOES suck, however, is when many major Linux distributions simultaneously choose to embrace wholly unreliable software despite the complaints and misgivings of a large majority of their userbase, and then as if that is not bad enough, replacing WORKING and RELIABLE software with this buggy software and make it completely non-optional.

The whole KDE4 debacle is another such example of this sort of behavior. I don't blame the KDE developers for wanting to build a better KDE (and as it evolves, it is indeed proving to be better in a variety of ways) but I am offended by how many distros shipped KDE4.0 as their default desktop LONG before it was ready or reliable (AND replaced WORKING KDE3 software with entirely buggy and unreliable KDE4 replacements without leaving a fallback option available). Now that KDE4.2 (and soon 4.3) is out and reaching a mostly stable level of performance, I could totally understand a distro choosing to make it their default desktop, but KDE4.0? What WERE they thinking?!?

Okay, I suppose that this turned out being something of a rant after all, and I imagine I should apologise for that...

I guess the point I'm trying to make here is most easily summed up with a VERY old saying that should probably be taken more seriously than it is these days:

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

And as a final note, I'd like to add a variation / addition to this that I've heard from more than a few folk during my time on this planet:

"...If it IS broke, fix it right the first time, so you don't have to fix it again!"

That's just my three cents plus two bits plus a copper farthing on the subject... Take it or leave it. I've gone on long enough. This is the end, that's all there is, there ain't no more... Go away now. You can stop reading... Are you still here?

~{ TSK }~

"If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little." ~ George Carlin ~ U.S. Comedian and Actor (1937 - 2008)

[Craig73]

rant

If it ain't broke... why did you need to update your distribution?

If you want it to stay the same... why not use an LTS edition?

[RealNC]

If it ain't broke... why did you need to update your distribution?

Because he wants new versions of application software. But that doesn't also imply a need for changes in operating system infrastructure, which is what the rant is about.

If you want it to stay the same... why not use an LTS edition?

See above.

There are, however, distributions, that allow you to choose the low-level components yourself. He should choose one of them. I believe Arch Linux, and anything Gentoo-based qualifies. You don't like PulseAudio? Disable it system-wide. Don't even like ALSA and prefer OSS? Same. PAM? I scratched that too.

In short, the "for the masses" distros may suck in this, but there are alternatives. You don't always have to accept what you are given.