Re: sad but true, Linux sucks, a bit
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Jarth Berilcosm <jarth@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Looking back on using Linux as a desktop OS for almost 15 years we've
> seen tons of features added but not much in terms of 'bite'.
Well deserved for its always crappy state throughout history.
Windows was very crappy internally (consider Win9x, WinXP) so Linux
earned some undeserved reputation.
Some Linux companies may get something decent at some point and then
those companies die.
> Hardware support is a lot better but still sucks when it comes to
> consumer multi-media, gaming performance etc.
It must be more modern to ask hardware vendors to send GPL drivers to
mainline kernel rather than to allow hardware vendors develop
third-party binary drivers.
> Someone wrote down a well documented list on all this and more
>
> http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/
> why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html
I knew that already and it is a good effort.
But most Linux advocates, even some developers, are good at denying
problems rather than fixing them.
> What bothers me most on this list is the mention of uncountable
> regressions. Subjectively i came to the same conclusion as observed on
> various occasion even with commercial products. The word uncountable
> seems a bit harsh though not unimaginable. If so, this is bad, verry bad
> as it indicates a possible lack of oversight and follow-up or peer
> review.
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9804.1/0149.html
> Fortunately there are some great projects ahead to improve the desktop,
> let's keep them fingers crossed one more time :-)
>
> I'm honestly a bit amazed the desktop is not a priority for developers
> which often seem to be keen on serious gaming, at last the few I've met
> seemed to be. Maybe they have a secret Microsoft box in the house for
> that, or a console of sorts. Or an Apple.
"not a priority"?
Isn't everyone working hard to break everything on desktop (Mir,
Wayland, etc.) one more time?
Some people used to advocate X11?
But at end of day, X11 sucks badly.
> Also, how many projects can one need for a specific purpose built on the
> libraries of a parent project providing 80% of the functionality. How
> much of these improvements go upstream, if at all ? I suspect the open-
> and-free-model lacks the incentive to go forth with fusing projects to
> making delivery of targets more timely.
I don't understand what you mean.
What I see is that Red Hat is being more and more like a dictator.
> Good developers are rare and should not be spread across so many
> projects. Good developers resolve bugs rather than building an economy
> upon them. A bug is a great marketing instrument for creating leverage,
> but it's also something stuck in the back of one's head in the long run.
Good developers do not bother with broken OS. Consider Miguel de Icaza.
Reply to: