I switched from macOS to Linux after 15 years of Apple(markosaric.com)
markosaric.com
I switched from macOS to Linux after 15 years of Apple
https://markosaric.com/linux/
864 comments
The Linux desktop never made it because it’s a terrible platform for distributing commercial applications.
The brutal fact is commercial software is essential to the success of any desktop or mobile platform. That’s because it brings massive investment. The total ongoing investment in commercial applications dwarfs that of open source desktop applications, in developer-hours terms, probably thousands, or tens of thousands to one. Getting to that scale means paying people money, and not just developers. Artists, designers, QA and domain experts in the specialist fields niche apps serve. There’s just no way open source apps can possibly compete.
By failing to provide compelling support for commercial application development and distribution, the Linux desktop has starved itself of the breadth and depth of apps needed to succeed. When you’re competing with the Mac, Windows, iOS or Android you’re not just competing with Apple, Microsoft or Google. You’re competing with the hundreds of billions of dollars in app and service ecosystems that have been built around those platforms.
The brutal fact is commercial software is essential to the success of any desktop or mobile platform. That’s because it brings massive investment. The total ongoing investment in commercial applications dwarfs that of open source desktop applications, in developer-hours terms, probably thousands, or tens of thousands to one. Getting to that scale means paying people money, and not just developers. Artists, designers, QA and domain experts in the specialist fields niche apps serve. There’s just no way open source apps can possibly compete.
By failing to provide compelling support for commercial application development and distribution, the Linux desktop has starved itself of the breadth and depth of apps needed to succeed. When you’re competing with the Mac, Windows, iOS or Android you’re not just competing with Apple, Microsoft or Google. You’re competing with the hundreds of billions of dollars in app and service ecosystems that have been built around those platforms.
I actually love this aspect of Linux, and if it ever does become successful it will kill it for me. Because every medium that gains a certain level of popularity will bring along a whole raft of commercial parasites that will spoil the original experience. It happened to the web, it happened to smart phones and it certainly would happen to Linux if it ever did gain substantial traction on the desktop.
This just sounds like some weird hipsterism. While Linux has plenty of programming tools, there are plenty of other industries that are underserved by Linux and I don't see how putting out commercial programs for those people will "kill it for you." Linux more than anything else allows you to just not involve yourself in things you don't want concern yourself with.
It's definitely not a "hipsterism". I agree with OP as I've been using Linux as my daily driver on both desktop and all personal laptops since 2003. I've gone through a number of distros over that time and I do pay for a few applications that run natively on Linux. However all mainstream OSes, today, are a garbage experience comparatively. Locked down, too many choices made for you already out of the box, excessive local advertising and that's just getting started. I'm forced to use Windows or OS X at work, I choose the latter, but still do the majority of my productive tasks outside of Apple. I'd pick my aging T470 all day long over my corp issued 16" MBP.
I don't want corporations like Apple or Microsoft controlling my hardware. We can see where that's got us and it's a disgusting dead end of the user not truly having control or ownership.
I don't want corporations like Apple or Microsoft controlling my hardware. We can see where that's got us and it's a disgusting dead end of the user not truly having control or ownership.
"I'm not like the normies" definitely is a hipsterism.
Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point. It's all about building random crap for the sake of building it and hand-editing config files.
On the desktop 90% of the projects are second rate clones of commercial software with a weird GUI, poorer features, and added user hostility.
As for corporations - they already control your hardware. There is no such thing as open hardware, and won't be until chip-level designs can be fabbed at home. (And even then, because chip design is far beyond the skills of the average hacker and won't be practical without AI doing the heavy lifting.)
But worse - Linux and corporations have both locked down your imagination to the point where you cannot imagine that your experience does not generalise.
Access to source doesn't change that, because access to source code and tinkering aren't a substitute for being able to imagine original, beautiful, and useful new things for end users - not just an endless churn of half-finished clone projects and infinite dev tools.
Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point. It's all about building random crap for the sake of building it and hand-editing config files.
On the desktop 90% of the projects are second rate clones of commercial software with a weird GUI, poorer features, and added user hostility.
As for corporations - they already control your hardware. There is no such thing as open hardware, and won't be until chip-level designs can be fabbed at home. (And even then, because chip design is far beyond the skills of the average hacker and won't be practical without AI doing the heavy lifting.)
But worse - Linux and corporations have both locked down your imagination to the point where you cannot imagine that your experience does not generalise.
Access to source doesn't change that, because access to source code and tinkering aren't a substitute for being able to imagine original, beautiful, and useful new things for end users - not just an endless churn of half-finished clone projects and infinite dev tools.
> "I'm not like the normies" definitely is a hipsterism.
No, it isn't.
"I'm not like the normies, because I am cool and underground." is a hipsterism.
"I'm not like the normies, because unlike them I happen to possess the skills to escape from a situation we all hate" is not an hipsterism.
> Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point.
This is also completely false. Improvements were made, things generally work out of the box. Polished and user friendly user interfaces exist.
_But_: interfacing with those commercial products/services that spoiled the fun of mainstream systems generally sucks. Because those only work if you give up control to them. Which was one of the main reasons you went to Linux anyway.
No, it isn't.
"I'm not like the normies, because I am cool and underground." is a hipsterism.
"I'm not like the normies, because unlike them I happen to possess the skills to escape from a situation we all hate" is not an hipsterism.
> Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point.
This is also completely false. Improvements were made, things generally work out of the box. Polished and user friendly user interfaces exist.
_But_: interfacing with those commercial products/services that spoiled the fun of mainstream systems generally sucks. Because those only work if you give up control to them. Which was one of the main reasons you went to Linux anyway.
> Tinkering is the point
No. You can do it if you want, but you don't have to.
I used to have a huge .emacsrc, .Xresources and what not in the far past. Today I have just a couple of lines that help me avoiding stupid mistakes, but nothing at all to try to tune look and feel. I use Xfce on some machines and i3 on others. Both just work out of the box. The former for an average user, the latter of course needs a certain attitude and some learning initially. I am sure you can also work with Gnome or KDE without starting tinkering.
Maybe one exception: hdpi support on Xfce does not seem to be ready, at least not on Xubuntu LTS. So one step of tinkering was needed: Turn off the nonsense. And never look back.
No. You can do it if you want, but you don't have to.
I used to have a huge .emacsrc, .Xresources and what not in the far past. Today I have just a couple of lines that help me avoiding stupid mistakes, but nothing at all to try to tune look and feel. I use Xfce on some machines and i3 on others. Both just work out of the box. The former for an average user, the latter of course needs a certain attitude and some learning initially. I am sure you can also work with Gnome or KDE without starting tinkering.
Maybe one exception: hdpi support on Xfce does not seem to be ready, at least not on Xubuntu LTS. So one step of tinkering was needed: Turn off the nonsense. And never look back.
> Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point. It's all about building random crap for the sake of building it and hand-editing config files.
Bollocks. I use linux for my work every day and like my privacy and the confidentiality of my data.
Bollocks. I use linux for my work every day and like my privacy and the confidentiality of my data.
> Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering.
This is just flat out wrong. I spend more time waiting for OS X to "upgrade" than I ever do with package management and kernel upgrades in Linux. Ultimately upgrades in Linux are easier, there's no tinkering required. For odd configurations, sure - there may be some tinkering you can do to make things work more how you'd like. For example I have a SFF desktop machine that runs an eGPU. I only want the eGPU for some OpenCV use cases and I run the iGPU for my desktop window manager. Sure, in that case I did have to tweak things a bit, but I actually found an eGPU manager [0] in the process and everything now "just works".
But printing, window management, software installation, etc are all simple and just as easy (if not more so) than what you've described - "...hand-editing config files". I'd say you are not a Linux user or have not tried any notable Linux distributions in a long time if that's your perspective.
> As for corporations - they already control your hardware.
No, they don't. While, yes, Intel and AMD may have things in their hardware that I don't control - the Linux distributions I use don't have copious amounts of telemetry being fed back to corporations like Apple/Microsoft/Google.
> But worse - Linux and corporations have both locked down your imagination to the point where you cannot imagine that your experience does not generalise.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here but I'd have to say, in my opinion, the comment doesn't seem to make any sense given my long-term experience with Linux on the desktop.
[0] https://github.com/hertg/egpu-switcher
This is just flat out wrong. I spend more time waiting for OS X to "upgrade" than I ever do with package management and kernel upgrades in Linux. Ultimately upgrades in Linux are easier, there's no tinkering required. For odd configurations, sure - there may be some tinkering you can do to make things work more how you'd like. For example I have a SFF desktop machine that runs an eGPU. I only want the eGPU for some OpenCV use cases and I run the iGPU for my desktop window manager. Sure, in that case I did have to tweak things a bit, but I actually found an eGPU manager [0] in the process and everything now "just works".
But printing, window management, software installation, etc are all simple and just as easy (if not more so) than what you've described - "...hand-editing config files". I'd say you are not a Linux user or have not tried any notable Linux distributions in a long time if that's your perspective.
> As for corporations - they already control your hardware.
No, they don't. While, yes, Intel and AMD may have things in their hardware that I don't control - the Linux distributions I use don't have copious amounts of telemetry being fed back to corporations like Apple/Microsoft/Google.
> But worse - Linux and corporations have both locked down your imagination to the point where you cannot imagine that your experience does not generalise.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here but I'd have to say, in my opinion, the comment doesn't seem to make any sense given my long-term experience with Linux on the desktop.
[0] https://github.com/hertg/egpu-switcher
So untrue in my experience.....the amount of times I had to fight with external screen resolutions, bad looking fonts, scrolling issues in chrome, etc.
> Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point. It's all about building random crap for the sake of building it and hand-editing config files.
I would rephrase this as "Linux is for people who like to customize their experience without compromise". Sure tinkering is fun but its the tool to get to your destination. When I first started using linux I spent maybe a year tinkering and playing with things. This would be along the lines of "XYZ isn't working how I want it to, let's find a way of making it work the way I want" where XYZ is anything from my screenshot tool to my window manager.
Over time this has meant switching DEs, writing glue scripts, swapping out bit and pieces here and there to build the desktop experience I want. Now I have things to my liking I just have an Ansible script which I can apply to a minimal install and have everything just the way I want it in a couple of minutes. I've not made any major changes in the last 10 years. I might add things as I find I need them but that's maybe a couple of dozen minutes a year.
I can however totally understand if people don't want that experience, most people just want to turn on their device and have it "just work" even if that "just working" means you have to conform to the way the developer thinks it should work. This is why people love Apple products, and the reason I don't.
I would rephrase this as "Linux is for people who like to customize their experience without compromise". Sure tinkering is fun but its the tool to get to your destination. When I first started using linux I spent maybe a year tinkering and playing with things. This would be along the lines of "XYZ isn't working how I want it to, let's find a way of making it work the way I want" where XYZ is anything from my screenshot tool to my window manager.
Over time this has meant switching DEs, writing glue scripts, swapping out bit and pieces here and there to build the desktop experience I want. Now I have things to my liking I just have an Ansible script which I can apply to a minimal install and have everything just the way I want it in a couple of minutes. I've not made any major changes in the last 10 years. I might add things as I find I need them but that's maybe a couple of dozen minutes a year.
I can however totally understand if people don't want that experience, most people just want to turn on their device and have it "just work" even if that "just working" means you have to conform to the way the developer thinks it should work. This is why people love Apple products, and the reason I don't.
Linux is about providing a good OS/kernel, good OS/kernels respect user preferences, respecting user preferences means to allow personalization and tinkering.
Linux is not a puzzle, it is an extensible tool.
http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/
Linux is not a puzzle, it is an extensible tool.
http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/
> On the desktop 90% of the projects are second rate clones of commercial software with a weird GUI, poorer features, and added user hostility.
A lot of free/open-source software is created by a single developer in their spare time, because they want an open & functional version of their favourite commercial app.
The weird GUI is what you get when you can't devote unlimited man-hours and millions of $ to the project.
A lot of good has come from the Linux and open-source movement, let's not pretend otherwise.
A lot of free/open-source software is created by a single developer in their spare time, because they want an open & functional version of their favourite commercial app.
The weird GUI is what you get when you can't devote unlimited man-hours and millions of $ to the project.
A lot of good has come from the Linux and open-source movement, let's not pretend otherwise.
> The weird GUI is what you get when you can't devote unlimited man-hours and millions of $ to the project.
I will take weird or unpolished GUI over polished, dark patterns, thank you very much.
Because that's the choice that we really make.
I will take weird or unpolished GUI over polished, dark patterns, thank you very much.
Because that's the choice that we really make.
I didn’t know the opposite of terrible UI is dark pattern.
It isn't, just like opposite of free software is not great UI. Despite that, free software and terrible UI gets conflated; so what's just one more conflation, right?
"Despite that, free software and terrible UI gets conflated"
I wonder why people would conflate those two things? Sure, not all free desktop software is bad, but enough of it is that people prefer the commercial alternatives.
I wonder why people would conflate those two things? Sure, not all free desktop software is bad, but enough of it is that people prefer the commercial alternatives.
Replace free with proprietary, commercial with free, bad with dark patterns and that will be just as true as your version.
> Linux is the OS for people who like tinkering. Tinkering is the point.
I don't tinker on my Linux machine. I bought a supported Linux machine (System76) and haven't tinkered with it at all since I bought it. I just wanted a machine that worked and I didn't have to deal with all the ways MacOS terminal experience was different from Linux terminal experience. Simple things like not having docker running in a hidden VM and many more.
I don't tinker on my Linux machine. I bought a supported Linux machine (System76) and haven't tinkered with it at all since I bought it. I just wanted a machine that worked and I didn't have to deal with all the ways MacOS terminal experience was different from Linux terminal experience. Simple things like not having docker running in a hidden VM and many more.
My daily driver is stock Fedora+Gnome. The only "tinkering" I've done on the desktop is switching dark/light themes and changing the wallpaper. Otherwise my tinkering is focused on my terminal tools needed for serious work - nvim, git, zsh etc. If I owned a Mac or Windows, I'd probably be the same.
> On the [Linux] desktop 90% of the projects are second rate clones of commercial software with a weird GUI, poorer features, and added user hostility.
GUI and features aside: I thought "added user hostility" was a big-corporate feature?
GUI and features aside: I thought "added user hostility" was a big-corporate feature?
Reading this comment really pissed me off, and I felt compelled to strike back, but upon seeing from the replies that it pissed off a lot of other people too, I feel much better.
Yes, those weird hipsters that think Stallman was on to something.
Free software is exactly what kept Linux free, the moment it would get locked up it would go the same way that Windows and MacOS have gone: consumer oriented platforms rather than computer operating systems. Ideal for pushing ads and for-pay software down your throat rather than tools for you to use as you see fit.
Free software is exactly what kept Linux free, the moment it would get locked up it would go the same way that Windows and MacOS have gone: consumer oriented platforms rather than computer operating systems. Ideal for pushing ads and for-pay software down your throat rather than tools for you to use as you see fit.
Microsoft putting ads into the OS was a real low blow, and they've made some really bad blunders over the years.
But there is nothing more valuable to me than my time. It takes me less time to be productive on Windows and OS X and remove all the junk, than it does to waste countless hours trying to get a Linux DE configured "just right" based on whatever combo I'm using and feature parity I need.
I'll chose my time over my money, and I'm OK with that. Turns out paying professionals for quality goods is an alright business model, and I'm not losing any sleep by not having source code access.
But there is nothing more valuable to me than my time. It takes me less time to be productive on Windows and OS X and remove all the junk, than it does to waste countless hours trying to get a Linux DE configured "just right" based on whatever combo I'm using and feature parity I need.
I'll chose my time over my money, and I'm OK with that. Turns out paying professionals for quality goods is an alright business model, and I'm not losing any sleep by not having source code access.
I too value my time. And yes, MacOS or Windows allow you to be productive almost right away compared to say Arch Linux. Compared to something like Ubuntu, I'm not so sure. And things which I use daily don't seem supported on Windows (using the GPG app on my Yubikey for SSH access).
But this is just an upfront cost. With Windows, which I've tried to use regularly, there are many annoyances which introduce friction in the day to day. So the "opex" if you will is much higher.
Just this morning I started my Windows machine to play a quick game and wanted to check out something on the internet beforehand. It started bugging me about some "recommended browser settings" in some Edge window that showed up half off-screen that I couldn't move. Then there's the Windows Terminal app which sometimes takes forever to start up. And windows that pop up and look active but aren't.
Then there's a bunch of other little annoyances which I now forget but over a work day end up aggravating. Of course, YMMV as they say, and I know people who aren't as bothered by those. But in case you are annoyed, the upfront cost of setting up your Linux DE just right may be cheaper in the long run.
I've spent a while setting up i3 a few years ago, just out of curiosity. I had been a MacOS user at the time for a very long time. But then something happened, and it grew on me. Now I only use my mac from time to time when idly watching a movie in bed, because I find it slower to use. I hate having to hunt around for windows, move then around, click on some Dock icon which sometimes doesn't show, others shows up while it shouldn't (in the full-screen Mail window usually).
I guess the point is that different people have different needs and are willing to pay different prices for those. There's also a case to be made about high upfront cost + low maintenance vs low upfront cost + high maintenance.
> Turns out paying professionals for quality goods is an alright business model, and I'm not losing any sleep by not having source code access.
Well, of course. Only issue is how you define quality, as related to what you need. For me, the price of the Windows license was lumped in the same bin with the GPU. Have to buy it to be able to play a game I wanted to play. But I'd feel robbed if I had to pay for it and than have to use it for my job. In my case, I haven't looked under the hood of the Linux kernel or the DE or the terminal app or anything, for that matter. It just works better for me. And I'm also OK to invest some time if it means I'll be more confortable down the road.
But this is just an upfront cost. With Windows, which I've tried to use regularly, there are many annoyances which introduce friction in the day to day. So the "opex" if you will is much higher.
Just this morning I started my Windows machine to play a quick game and wanted to check out something on the internet beforehand. It started bugging me about some "recommended browser settings" in some Edge window that showed up half off-screen that I couldn't move. Then there's the Windows Terminal app which sometimes takes forever to start up. And windows that pop up and look active but aren't.
Then there's a bunch of other little annoyances which I now forget but over a work day end up aggravating. Of course, YMMV as they say, and I know people who aren't as bothered by those. But in case you are annoyed, the upfront cost of setting up your Linux DE just right may be cheaper in the long run.
I've spent a while setting up i3 a few years ago, just out of curiosity. I had been a MacOS user at the time for a very long time. But then something happened, and it grew on me. Now I only use my mac from time to time when idly watching a movie in bed, because I find it slower to use. I hate having to hunt around for windows, move then around, click on some Dock icon which sometimes doesn't show, others shows up while it shouldn't (in the full-screen Mail window usually).
I guess the point is that different people have different needs and are willing to pay different prices for those. There's also a case to be made about high upfront cost + low maintenance vs low upfront cost + high maintenance.
> Turns out paying professionals for quality goods is an alright business model, and I'm not losing any sleep by not having source code access.
Well, of course. Only issue is how you define quality, as related to what you need. For me, the price of the Windows license was lumped in the same bin with the GPU. Have to buy it to be able to play a game I wanted to play. But I'd feel robbed if I had to pay for it and than have to use it for my job. In my case, I haven't looked under the hood of the Linux kernel or the DE or the terminal app or anything, for that matter. It just works better for me. And I'm also OK to invest some time if it means I'll be more confortable down the road.
I've used Linux DE far less than Windows/OS X, but I've spent more time setting up Linux than I ever have on many multiples years more use of the others. This doesn't even include things like digging into systemd or other supporting ecosystem players. Wifi, Bluetooth, HiDPI, and other common DE experiences are not always consistent with Linux distros and across hardware.
Wouldn't be surprised if I've spent more time alone on Linux just figuring out network file sharing than all other DE-related configurations combined.
On the other hand, I wouldn't deploy software against any other OS (unless it's an app). There's no world where I don't want or see Linux. I'm just not sold on it's DE experience so far.
There is no customization you can make to a DE that saves me so much time and energy long term that it makes up for all the other time and energy needed to invest in Linux DE as a daily driver. Most of my energy seems to be devoted to task-specific regiments, more influenced by that tasks software.
In twenty five years, I've probably spent less than $3,000 on Microsoft products personally. I've got my moneys worth.
Wouldn't be surprised if I've spent more time alone on Linux just figuring out network file sharing than all other DE-related configurations combined.
On the other hand, I wouldn't deploy software against any other OS (unless it's an app). There's no world where I don't want or see Linux. I'm just not sold on it's DE experience so far.
There is no customization you can make to a DE that saves me so much time and energy long term that it makes up for all the other time and energy needed to invest in Linux DE as a daily driver. Most of my energy seems to be devoted to task-specific regiments, more influenced by that tasks software.
In twenty five years, I've probably spent less than $3,000 on Microsoft products personally. I've got my moneys worth.
I've found Linux filesharing easier to work with than Windows but that's about it.
When on my local network, I'm at the point regardless of OS (Win, Linux, Mac alike) where I tend to fire up the Python built-in http.server module on whichever machine I want to share from and go to the other to download whatever files I need.
I have never gotten inter-OS file sharing like SMB/Samba to work right other than using rsync or scp. And the only intra-OS file sharing I've ever had a good experience with is Mac AirDrop.
I have never gotten inter-OS file sharing like SMB/Samba to work right other than using rsync or scp. And the only intra-OS file sharing I've ever had a good experience with is Mac AirDrop.
> I have never gotten inter-OS file sharing like SMB/Samba to work right other than using rsync or scp
That's weird. I usually just fire up Samba and everything works pretty much as expected. Granted, I don't use GUI tools, but one of the examples in the default config file is pretty much what you need (share the homes, or something to that effect).
That's weird. I usually just fire up Samba and everything works pretty much as expected. Granted, I don't use GUI tools, but one of the examples in the default config file is pretty much what you need (share the homes, or something to that effect).
Windows and OS X come ready for both SMB and NFS, which is the bulk of experiences I encounter. Apple AirDrop has also been very useful.
Mounting remote file systems can be done easily in the GUI, as can sharing. Like any such software, it's going to have a learning curve.
I can't remember the last time I was on Linux and didn't have to start off by installing cifs-utils, and then hunting down instructions on writing an .smbcredentials file.
Windows also makes it (relatively) easy to administer file sharing if you're on a AD domain. All said and done, I personally use Unraid for my home NAS.
Mounting remote file systems can be done easily in the GUI, as can sharing. Like any such software, it's going to have a learning curve.
I can't remember the last time I was on Linux and didn't have to start off by installing cifs-utils, and then hunting down instructions on writing an .smbcredentials file.
Windows also makes it (relatively) easy to administer file sharing if you're on a AD domain. All said and done, I personally use Unraid for my home NAS.
Windows makes it hard, when you need to have credentials from multiple domains and these domains do not have configured trust. It's a hell then.
Both macs and linux can handle this fine.
Both macs and linux can handle this fine.
Yeah using samba is just as hard on Linux. I've struggled to get AD to work correctly with older PC's. We run CNCs with Win 98.
NFS is simpler and easier to manage.
NFS is simpler and easier to manage.
Windows 98 does not support AD out of the box; the contemporary solution was NT4 domain.
There is a solution for that, dsclient, but it is still missing Kerberos support, so you have to account for that.
There is a solution for that, dsclient, but it is still missing Kerberos support, so you have to account for that.
> I've spent a while setting up i3 a few years ago, just out of curiosity. I had been a MacOS user at the time for a very long time. But then something happened, and it grew on me. Now I only use my mac from time to time when idly watching a movie in bed, because I find it slower to use. I hate having to hunt around for windows, move then around, click on some Dock icon which sometimes doesn't show
I went through exactly the same experience after trying i3. Also a Mac user. I couldn't move to Linux at the time because apps, so I did my best to recreate that experience on a Mac. Rectangle+Karabiner+Hammerspoon did the trick, and at this point I'm so used to it that when I set up my Linux desktop, I actually recreated the same shortcuts in i3 vs. the default i3 config.
So I would say if you _have to_ stay on a Mac, there are ways to customise and tinker too, with the end result much better than you expect.
I went through exactly the same experience after trying i3. Also a Mac user. I couldn't move to Linux at the time because apps, so I did my best to recreate that experience on a Mac. Rectangle+Karabiner+Hammerspoon did the trick, and at this point I'm so used to it that when I set up my Linux desktop, I actually recreated the same shortcuts in i3 vs. the default i3 config.
So I would say if you _have to_ stay on a Mac, there are ways to customise and tinker too, with the end result much better than you expect.
I was using Karabiner a lot at the time. I hadn't heard of Rectangle nor Hammerspoon, but I tried Amethyst (or something like that) which would provide a tiling experience, but I hated it. It was laggy, and I couldn't get used to the windows jumping around. Maybe it was my oldish MacBook (late 2013 15" MBP), although I still find that computer plenty fast for my needs.
I was more or less in the same boat app-wise, as for work I use Office 365 and at the time the web apps were barely usable. I also loved Apple Mail, and to me, it still is the best email client I've ever used (disclaimer: I don't tend to do anything "fancy" with my email). Nowadays, Outlook online works well enough for my needs (I'd say it's actually better than when I was using the 'heavy client' on the Windows machine I was given). Teams works well (as in no worse than elsewhere) on Linux, too, so all my work-related needs are met.
I was more or less in the same boat app-wise, as for work I use Office 365 and at the time the web apps were barely usable. I also loved Apple Mail, and to me, it still is the best email client I've ever used (disclaimer: I don't tend to do anything "fancy" with my email). Nowadays, Outlook online works well enough for my needs (I'd say it's actually better than when I was using the 'heavy client' on the Windows machine I was given). Teams works well (as in no worse than elsewhere) on Linux, too, so all my work-related needs are met.
Rectangle is just an app that helps to move windows around, like on Windows: Win-RightArrow to move to right half of screen, some other combination to maximize etc. I found that recreating i3 experience as-is on a Mac is counterproductive, especially when it's on a laptop-sized screen. I rarely want to split the screen, and when I do, it's mostly left-right halves. The only exception is terminal, and I use tmux for that.
Hammerspoon is just an automation tool for Mac, you can do a lot of things with it, including moving windows around and a lot of other stuff (just look at the docs to get a feel). I use it as an app switcher: I found that it's more efficient to do "show me Slack" or "show me VSCode" than "move to workspace 3 where VSCode should be". I don't use workspaces at all nowadays. So, with the help of Karabiner, I mapped my most-used apps to combinations like "caps+g" for Google Chrome, "caps+s" for Slack, "caps+c" for VSCode etc. And for cycling through windows of the same app, there's a built-in cmd-` on MacOS.
Hammerspoon is just an automation tool for Mac, you can do a lot of things with it, including moving windows around and a lot of other stuff (just look at the docs to get a feel). I use it as an app switcher: I found that it's more efficient to do "show me Slack" or "show me VSCode" than "move to workspace 3 where VSCode should be". I don't use workspaces at all nowadays. So, with the help of Karabiner, I mapped my most-used apps to combinations like "caps+g" for Google Chrome, "caps+s" for Slack, "caps+c" for VSCode etc. And for cycling through windows of the same app, there's a built-in cmd-` on MacOS.
The last time I configured my DE was when I switched to Xfce 15 or so years ago. Since then, whenever I get a new laptop, I just copy my home directory from the old one to the new one and it just works.
And you've made no tweaks or changes in the 15 years since? I have changes to my dot files on a constant basis (not to mention changing hardware needs).
I've not touched a dotfile in a decade+.
One thing that people fall into is the ability to tweak things endlessly. If you simply don't do that and use a good default install then you are going to do just fine without all that tuning.
For me my main tools are shell, browser, various audio related programs (audacity, midi editors, score editors and so on) and installing a new linux machine takes about as long as copying the data off the medium takes. Then I copy over (or mount, depending on the circumstances) my homedir and get to work.
One thing that people fall into is the ability to tweak things endlessly. If you simply don't do that and use a good default install then you are going to do just fine without all that tuning.
For me my main tools are shell, browser, various audio related programs (audacity, midi editors, score editors and so on) and installing a new linux machine takes about as long as copying the data off the medium takes. Then I copy over (or mount, depending on the circumstances) my homedir and get to work.
Ubuntu also had ads in it: In 2013 they started displaying Amazon Books in their “Start menu”, which had the effect of uploading any keystroke of the main menu.
After the outrcy, the also removed it and never tried it again.
The other systems did not react the same way; they still consider that doing it is fine.
The other systems did not react the same way; they still consider that doing it is fine.
> But there is nothing more valuable to me than my time. It takes me less time to be productive on Windows and OS X and remove all the junk, than it does to waste countless hours trying to get a Linux DE configured "just right" based on whatever combo I'm using and feature parity I need.
Yeah, I agree.
But the major difference might be that once configured a linux desktop environment is "just right" for quite a lot longer than you think -- and once it is "just right" you get marginal productivity gains in small aspects, which in aggregate, is probably a lot of time saved.
I'm a bit biased because I already sank the cost into my desktop setup in 2011. But frankly: my desktop environment very much gets out of my way.
Yeah, I agree.
But the major difference might be that once configured a linux desktop environment is "just right" for quite a lot longer than you think -- and once it is "just right" you get marginal productivity gains in small aspects, which in aggregate, is probably a lot of time saved.
I'm a bit biased because I already sank the cost into my desktop setup in 2011. But frankly: my desktop environment very much gets out of my way.
Setting a window to be "always on top" saves me more time than all of window's productivity features combined.
To me it's to pull the plug on my ethernet connection.
IMO the developer experience on Linux is first class, and it's ordinary user experience that drives me to MacOS — all the apps and games which will probably never come to Linux.
Plus, notwithstanding the CSAM detection thing, Apple has been steadily introducing a stream of really sweet consumer privacy features for the ordinary user, such as Sign in with Apple, Apple relay (basically TOR lite for grandma), email aliases, etc.
Plus, notwithstanding the CSAM detection thing, Apple has been steadily introducing a stream of really sweet consumer privacy features for the ordinary user, such as Sign in with Apple, Apple relay (basically TOR lite for grandma), email aliases, etc.
Even the installation process has junk in the final steps when it insists on asking about cloud and stuff, although you want just a regular local account. In end I found it easier to use an Autounattend.xml [1], then deal with that crap.
[1]: created with https://www.windowsafg.com/win10x86_x64_uefi.html
[1]: created with https://www.windowsafg.com/win10x86_x64_uefi.html
I don't see why providing commercial applications would cause Linux to "lock up".
Say someone implements an appstore for Linux, and start selling apps. This could theoretically be enough to get commercial developers onto the platform, opening up for wider popularization of Linux. That doesn't mean you have to install that appstore.. Heck of Linux ever becomes popular, it's probably gonna be Ubuntu. If you don't like that, well, use fedora then. Or nixOS!
Say someone implements an appstore for Linux, and start selling apps. This could theoretically be enough to get commercial developers onto the platform, opening up for wider popularization of Linux. That doesn't mean you have to install that appstore.. Heck of Linux ever becomes popular, it's probably gonna be Ubuntu. If you don't like that, well, use fedora then. Or nixOS!
Except steam. That is a piece of commercial software that i really want on my linux. I wasnt sold at first but a few years in and i love Proton. The ability to install the games i love without headaches, even VR title, is imho the biggest development for linux desktop since web browsers.
The way I see it it's like building a house or buying one. People should do what they want. I'd like more of us to build our houses, but to each his own.
[deleted]
> I don't see how putting out commercial programs for those people will "kill it for you."
Look at nvidia. They release proprietary drivers that do things in the opposite way things are supposed to be done. It's supposed to be integrated, they do their own thing. It's supposed to be open, they close it. They only do things if it's on their terms. They don't contribute to Linux as a whole, they merely co-opt it for their own purposes. They don't believe in making Linux a better system for all, they do just enough to satisfy their customers and call it a day.
If that's what commercial software means for Linux, the other platforms can keep it.
Look at nvidia. They release proprietary drivers that do things in the opposite way things are supposed to be done. It's supposed to be integrated, they do their own thing. It's supposed to be open, they close it. They only do things if it's on their terms. They don't contribute to Linux as a whole, they merely co-opt it for their own purposes. They don't believe in making Linux a better system for all, they do just enough to satisfy their customers and call it a day.
If that's what commercial software means for Linux, the other platforms can keep it.
Uh, what? Wasn't Linux about the user's freedom? If people want Adobe and Solidworks (which will definitely behave like Nvidia), let them have it.
It would be a benefit to Linux adoption.
It would be a benefit to Linux adoption.
It's absolutely about user freedom. The problem is companies will sacrifice our freedom as soon as it starts making things inconvenient for them. Our freedom literally gets in the way of their business.
What do you expect? They're a business.
I expect them to care and work with kernel developers in order to make things better for everyone. Intel does, why can't nvidia? Intel drivers are part of the kernel and they literally just work. I avoid nvidia products like the plague now.
You can theoretically not involve yourself in Facebook either.
Once your default distribution starts shipping with built in ads, and every other distribution follows suit because it makes them boatloads of money, your linux desktop will be well and truly dead.
Once your default distribution starts shipping with built in ads, and every other distribution follows suit because it makes them boatloads of money, your linux desktop will be well and truly dead.
> Once your default distribution starts shipping with built in ads, and every other distribution follows suit because it makes them boatloads of money, your linux desktop will be well and truly dead.
Is there some idiom or trope to this that I'm missing that makes it obvious sarcasm? Because that's literally not possible without some inconceivable laws being passed, so I'm confused as to what you're trying to communicate.
Is there some idiom or trope to this that I'm missing that makes it obvious sarcasm? Because that's literally not possible without some inconceivable laws being passed, so I'm confused as to what you're trying to communicate.
Then a team forms up to fork and strip the ads, just like Devuan stripped systemd.
Wont happen, Ubuntu tried it by integrating amazon into search and had to backpedal pretty quickly.
Exactly that’s when I left Ubuntu. They really had a chance, and shot their own foot with dedication. Who would upload every keystroke of a Linux user to Amazon?
Mozilla makes Google the default search engine in Firefox because they're paid to. What's your point? Without money, the biggest projects would struggle to stay afloat.
But Ubuntu is still in a fringe market. The discussion is about what would be if it were in a mainstream market.
Is it somehow gonna make the DE not open source?
I think Firefox and Chromium are good examples of what direction can be expected of mainstream open source projects that end up being steered by a company with commercial needs.
Both got forked a bunch, but the mother project remains the popular one due to user stickiness and, frankly, sheer amount of (paid) effort invested compared to small-scale volunteer efforts. Users can still choose to go with Iceweasel, disabled Pocket integration or Ungoogled Chromium or whatever fork de jour, but generally they don't because "the ecosystem keeps moving". They generally get more desirable things added than annoyances. Unless a company gets it wrong and you get a WhatsApp-level backlash to make another competitor viable.
With constantly moving goalposts, commercial interests can keep the upper hand as the community (and much other competition) can't keep up fast enough. That's why Google keeps pushing the web into ever new directions, and why standardized APIs got replaced by ever-changing Electron apps with mandatory auto-update.
If the popular distributions ship with ads, I'm not afraid as long as there is competition out there that does without. I can always do Arch or Debian instead of Ubuntu and I know they'll do the right thing.
Where it gets dangerous is when the base technology is controlled by commercial interests. Microsoft owning secure boot certificates, Android not getting drivers upstreamed, Apple deciding who gets to compete by owning the App Store. Linux may end up in this spot at some point if a particular vendor (or consortium of commercial interests) becomes too powerful compared to the community and smaller competition. Once it gets there, the only escape is having viable alternatives.
If you rely on commercial software, your alternatives come with huge switching costs. Chromium to Firefox is a little tedious, Mac to Linux is a major disruption. The more you rely on a particular piece of commercial software, the more they can control you.
But competition generally does the trick. I don't mind games being closed source, there are so many quality alternatives that the game studios simply can't lock most users in. Now, app stores for games? That's where you want to be cautious, because they control what competition looks like. Operating systems and drivers? If they turn on you, better start swearing and leaving investments behind. Chip-level DRM? Zero leverage, ask your government for help and if they're not willing, you're screwed.
So really, commercial software isn't that much of an issue high up in the stack. The lower you get, the more careful you want to be about end user communities retaining control. Let the companies make apps, let them sell apps, don't let them grow platforms. The platforms should belong to users.
If a company comes along and makes a commercial platform out of Linux, run.
Both got forked a bunch, but the mother project remains the popular one due to user stickiness and, frankly, sheer amount of (paid) effort invested compared to small-scale volunteer efforts. Users can still choose to go with Iceweasel, disabled Pocket integration or Ungoogled Chromium or whatever fork de jour, but generally they don't because "the ecosystem keeps moving". They generally get more desirable things added than annoyances. Unless a company gets it wrong and you get a WhatsApp-level backlash to make another competitor viable.
With constantly moving goalposts, commercial interests can keep the upper hand as the community (and much other competition) can't keep up fast enough. That's why Google keeps pushing the web into ever new directions, and why standardized APIs got replaced by ever-changing Electron apps with mandatory auto-update.
If the popular distributions ship with ads, I'm not afraid as long as there is competition out there that does without. I can always do Arch or Debian instead of Ubuntu and I know they'll do the right thing.
Where it gets dangerous is when the base technology is controlled by commercial interests. Microsoft owning secure boot certificates, Android not getting drivers upstreamed, Apple deciding who gets to compete by owning the App Store. Linux may end up in this spot at some point if a particular vendor (or consortium of commercial interests) becomes too powerful compared to the community and smaller competition. Once it gets there, the only escape is having viable alternatives.
If you rely on commercial software, your alternatives come with huge switching costs. Chromium to Firefox is a little tedious, Mac to Linux is a major disruption. The more you rely on a particular piece of commercial software, the more they can control you.
But competition generally does the trick. I don't mind games being closed source, there are so many quality alternatives that the game studios simply can't lock most users in. Now, app stores for games? That's where you want to be cautious, because they control what competition looks like. Operating systems and drivers? If they turn on you, better start swearing and leaving investments behind. Chip-level DRM? Zero leverage, ask your government for help and if they're not willing, you're screwed.
So really, commercial software isn't that much of an issue high up in the stack. The lower you get, the more careful you want to be about end user communities retaining control. Let the companies make apps, let them sell apps, don't let them grow platforms. The platforms should belong to users.
If a company comes along and makes a commercial platform out of Linux, run.
You're missing the part that you won't be maintaining your whole system yourself. You'll instead be relying on other people to do in the form of distros and packages.
The trouble comes from a slippage in expectations and the increased incentives to do bad things.
Once some (e.g.) spyware in some software is expected and acceptable, suddenly more spyware in even more apps could potentially be acceptable. Now it becomes a constant effort to keeping track of a known good application set which expends a lot of energy. And any one of those apps in the good set could spoil at any time.
And of course, the increased commercial incentives of a lot of non-technical people using the platform immensely increase the likelihood of this occuring.
So it's not hipsterism, it's just something that's been observed to happen many, many times.
The trouble comes from a slippage in expectations and the increased incentives to do bad things.
Once some (e.g.) spyware in some software is expected and acceptable, suddenly more spyware in even more apps could potentially be acceptable. Now it becomes a constant effort to keeping track of a known good application set which expends a lot of energy. And any one of those apps in the good set could spoil at any time.
And of course, the increased commercial incentives of a lot of non-technical people using the platform immensely increase the likelihood of this occuring.
So it's not hipsterism, it's just something that's been observed to happen many, many times.
Sounds more Nietzschean to me. He said something to the effect of universal literacy wouldn’t be without downsides. The quality of written material would drop as previously illiterate people would write and water down literary culture. Not sure I agree with that wrt literature, but tech was certainly more enjoyable to me before everyone had to consider the “average user,” make things user-friendly, and of course not ignore the enormous profitability that mass market software offers.
Elitism is always good for the elite.
> tech was certainly more enjoyable to me before everyone had to consider the “average user,”
Yeah. To people like us, computing has intrinsic value. We like the system. We want to control it. We want to understand it. We want to make it better. We want to make it ours.
Normal people simply don't care about this. Corporations make every effort to hide the computer from them. That's where the money is so we end up getting lumped together with this average person.
Why can't we have systems designed for programmers? It doesn't matter if some normal person can't use it.
> tech was certainly more enjoyable to me before everyone had to consider the “average user,”
Yeah. To people like us, computing has intrinsic value. We like the system. We want to control it. We want to understand it. We want to make it better. We want to make it ours.
Normal people simply don't care about this. Corporations make every effort to hide the computer from them. That's where the money is so we end up getting lumped together with this average person.
Why can't we have systems designed for programmers? It doesn't matter if some normal person can't use it.
My cynical answer is that we often do, but once they are modestly profitable they get gobbled up by The Business and MBA-types find ways to grow their market share by making it palatable to normals.
I think the problem with commercial apps on Linux is just that the standard Linux security model is too loose for it. Android and IOS have the right idea that apps should be denied permission to do things unless the users says it's okay. I don't want random inscrutable binaries from various companies reading my passwords or email just because all my files are wide open to any software I run on the same user ID.
So far desktop Linux has successfully repelled most commercial software simply by being very difficult to package software for.
So far desktop Linux has successfully repelled most commercial software simply by being very difficult to package software for.
> So far desktop Linux has successfully repelled most commercial software simply by being very difficult to package software for.
A couple of guys could figure out how to package Ardour so that it runs on every Linux distro except NixOS [0]. The idea that its hard to package software in a cross-distro way is pure BS.
[0] NixOS plays games with ld.so, which breaks any packaging that relies on being able to set LD_LOAD_PATH. It's the only Linux distro that does this to my knowledge.
A couple of guys could figure out how to package Ardour so that it runs on every Linux distro except NixOS [0]. The idea that its hard to package software in a cross-distro way is pure BS.
[0] NixOS plays games with ld.so, which breaks any packaging that relies on being able to set LD_LOAD_PATH. It's the only Linux distro that does this to my knowledge.
That's an open-source application, which provides two fallbacks if the binary on their website doesn't work for whatever reason: you can compile from source, or you can install from a package provided by your distro, if there is one. Those last two generally aren't an option for closed-source commercial software. Also, since they're not asking about package format I'll assume their package is just a tarball, which works fine for some programs but it's not a proper package in the sense of being something you install from a package manager (and can later upgrade/remove with a package manager).
In general you can probably get a program to run on just about any Linux platform by providing X86 and ARM binaries, statically linking everything, and having fallbacks in case you need to use a certain subsystem (graphics, audio, etc..) and you don't know which one the user is going to want to use.
My experience with software development for big enterprisey customers is that you figure out what distros most of your customers are going to be using, and you test on those distros. That's a fair bit of work, because you might have to release both apt and rpm packages and maintain them, and the test environment is complicated and it doesn't cover the case where some random person wants to run your product on Arch/Mandriva/Gentoo/Mint or whatever. Testing every Linux distro is just not practically feasible, so a lot of people will end up running on platforms you didn't test. Maybe that's fine.
In general you can probably get a program to run on just about any Linux platform by providing X86 and ARM binaries, statically linking everything, and having fallbacks in case you need to use a certain subsystem (graphics, audio, etc..) and you don't know which one the user is going to want to use.
My experience with software development for big enterprisey customers is that you figure out what distros most of your customers are going to be using, and you test on those distros. That's a fair bit of work, because you might have to release both apt and rpm packages and maintain them, and the test environment is complicated and it doesn't cover the case where some random person wants to run your product on Arch/Mandriva/Gentoo/Mint or whatever. Testing every Linux distro is just not practically feasible, so a lot of people will end up running on platforms you didn't test. Maybe that's fine.
> which provides two fallbacks if the binary on their website doesn't work for whatever reason
I wasn't addressing the fallbacks in any way.
> My experience with software development for big enterprisey customers is that you figure out what distros most of your customers are going to be using, and you test on those distros.
This is their mistake. If you instead understand how applications run on Linux in general, you can do what Ardour (and Firefox and many, many others) do: create distro agnostic binary installable versions. We don't test every distro - we don't need to. We design the package so that if certain extremely minimal conditions are met, the package will run. Firefox has done the same (even if many people use the distro version instead).
I wasn't addressing the fallbacks in any way.
> My experience with software development for big enterprisey customers is that you figure out what distros most of your customers are going to be using, and you test on those distros.
This is their mistake. If you instead understand how applications run on Linux in general, you can do what Ardour (and Firefox and many, many others) do: create distro agnostic binary installable versions. We don't test every distro - we don't need to. We design the package so that if certain extremely minimal conditions are met, the package will run. Firefox has done the same (even if many people use the distro version instead).
Ideally you shouldn't need to test every distro, and everything should "just work" but then you're likely to have users run into bugs and incompatibilities you haven't seen because you didn't test that case.
Distro-agnostic tarballs or self-extracting archives you can just expand and run can work, but it's also not ideal because it subverts the package manager. Package managers allow you to install, remove, and update all the software installed in a system in a consistent way, and a tarball exists outside that ecosystem and lacks its benefits. In that sense, a binary tarball is a second-class citizen that doesn't integrate well with the rest of the system and is probably a security liability. Maybe that's an acceptable trade-off for a few applications, but it should leave a person with a "there's probably a better way to do this" sort of feeling.
Distro-agnostic tarballs or self-extracting archives you can just expand and run can work, but it's also not ideal because it subverts the package manager. Package managers allow you to install, remove, and update all the software installed in a system in a consistent way, and a tarball exists outside that ecosystem and lacks its benefits. In that sense, a binary tarball is a second-class citizen that doesn't integrate well with the rest of the system and is probably a security liability. Maybe that's an acceptable trade-off for a few applications, but it should leave a person with a "there's probably a better way to do this" sort of feeling.
The package manager creates an ecosystem of libraries and applications.
If your bundle contains the application and its libraries, it's not a part of that ecosystem, and it makes sense that it exists outside of it. In the case of Ardour, since a number of the dependency stack libraries contain patches that will never be upstreamed (or are for EOL'ed libraries), it makes even more sense.
Yes, there is the risk that if the bundle contains a security issue that has already been updated within the package manager's ecosystem, that's a liability.
But the flip side is that "integrating well with the rest of the system" is precisely what makes 3rd party packaging for all (or even many) distros challenging. I note that most of the efforts to address the situation all essentially bypass the package manager ecosystem (flatpak, for example), and that macOS has used the "standalone application folder except for core system libs" for decades now. The liabilities are real, but small, and seem to be an acceptable tradeoff for software that developers want to run on all (or even many) distros.
If your bundle contains the application and its libraries, it's not a part of that ecosystem, and it makes sense that it exists outside of it. In the case of Ardour, since a number of the dependency stack libraries contain patches that will never be upstreamed (or are for EOL'ed libraries), it makes even more sense.
Yes, there is the risk that if the bundle contains a security issue that has already been updated within the package manager's ecosystem, that's a liability.
But the flip side is that "integrating well with the rest of the system" is precisely what makes 3rd party packaging for all (or even many) distros challenging. I note that most of the efforts to address the situation all essentially bypass the package manager ecosystem (flatpak, for example), and that macOS has used the "standalone application folder except for core system libs" for decades now. The liabilities are real, but small, and seem to be an acceptable tradeoff for software that developers want to run on all (or even many) distros.
That’s missing the point by focusing on a proof of concept. It’s a very long way from showing a mostly-cross-platform OSS tool, to being an ISV that provides technical support and maintenance for a significant commercial application, for millions of nontechnical users, with legacy support, on a mercurial set of cross-platform moving targets.
To a product manager, this looks like a black hole where money and engineering/tech support resources get chewed up with very little value creation to show for it.
It’s also how some very mediocre distributions became enterprise standards for Linux - their value proposition basically being, “we’re not a moving target, and the Fortune 500 can buy a maintenance contract from us”. But this only happened in server land, where the hardware ecosystem isn’t so chaotic.
To a product manager, this looks like a black hole where money and engineering/tech support resources get chewed up with very little value creation to show for it.
It’s also how some very mediocre distributions became enterprise standards for Linux - their value proposition basically being, “we’re not a moving target, and the Fortune 500 can buy a maintenance contract from us”. But this only happened in server land, where the hardware ecosystem isn’t so chaotic.
It's not missing the point at all.
"significant commercial application": you have no idea how many downloads or users of Ardour there are.
"mercurial set of cross-platform moving targets": precisely what is addressed.
"nontechnical users": that's a new constraint not present in the original description, but probably not much of an issue if you're discussing a specialized tool rather than a "desktop" application.
"hardware ecosystem": completely irrelevant to the case in question.
"significant commercial application": you have no idea how many downloads or users of Ardour there are.
"mercurial set of cross-platform moving targets": precisely what is addressed.
"nontechnical users": that's a new constraint not present in the original description, but probably not much of an issue if you're discussing a specialized tool rather than a "desktop" application.
"hardware ecosystem": completely irrelevant to the case in question.
[deleted]
Looking past the ridiculous hostility; the case in question is why it’s super rare to target Linux for desktop applications. The example offered has none of the trappings of a commercial offering.
By all means, though, all the best with your startup.
By all means, though, all the best with your startup.
It's a 21 year old project that nets in excess of US$200k/year, and has been the basis of 3 commercial spinoff products. Not a large scale commercial project, certainly, but not a startup.
The question wasn't "why it’s super rare to target Linux for desktop applications". It wasn't a question at all, in fact. It was an assertion that it's hard to package 3rd party applications for Linux, and I am asserting that this claim is incorrect.
As to whether or not the packaging situation explains why it's super rare to target Linux for desktop application, that is indeed a different question, with multiple answers.
The question wasn't "why it’s super rare to target Linux for desktop applications". It wasn't a question at all, in fact. It was an assertion that it's hard to package 3rd party applications for Linux, and I am asserting that this claim is incorrect.
As to whether or not the packaging situation explains why it's super rare to target Linux for desktop application, that is indeed a different question, with multiple answers.
Sandboxing that is both secure and allows non trivial application software to work correctly is HARD.
I'm not convinced anyone actually got both right so far - see how recent sanboxing improvements basically killed Anbox on modern Android versions. Or try to get a ssh/samba server running on a Samsung Galaxy device so you can push files to it to avoid buggy inconvenient MTP - mission impossible!
I'm not convinced anyone actually got both right so far - see how recent sanboxing improvements basically killed Anbox on modern Android versions. Or try to get a ssh/samba server running on a Samsung Galaxy device so you can push files to it to avoid buggy inconvenient MTP - mission impossible!
It's not easy, and probably involves rethinking things like the basic assumptions of a traditional POSIX-style environment. But I think it's a necessary feature these days, and I hope it eventually becomes commonplace in Linux, or perhaps there will one day be a plausible Linux-replacement.
Commercialization in that anything goes spirit, would results in Linux just becoming another carbon-copy of they Mac/Win flailing walled in garden ecosystems, everyone wants to escape from. The whole project lifes and breaths because it didn't open up to the parasites of decay. And now that these are squeezing there platforms to death, some people will even put up with homespun clonky UI.
GNU Linux was specifically developed, to escape the Softwarmageddon that is currently playing out in the other centralized eco-systems. To weaken that, would be to re-invite disaster. In my eyes, linux should ban commercial software like Teams from running, if there is a open source alternative. Chop of a limb if you want to survive the infection of end-stage-surveillance capitalism. Let the corpo-borgs eat one another.
GNU Linux was specifically developed, to escape the Softwarmageddon that is currently playing out in the other centralized eco-systems. To weaken that, would be to re-invite disaster. In my eyes, linux should ban commercial software like Teams from running, if there is a open source alternative. Chop of a limb if you want to survive the infection of end-stage-surveillance capitalism. Let the corpo-borgs eat one another.
> Mac/Win flailing walled in garden ecosystems, everyone wants to escape from
Isn't any given distro's package repository basically the same thing? I mean, sure you can go around it but the same is true of Google's Play Store, it's just a pain in the ass in both cases.
Isn't any given distro's package repository basically the same thing? I mean, sure you can go around it but the same is true of Google's Play Store, it's just a pain in the ass in both cases.
"Mac/Win flailing walled in garden ecosystems, everyone wants to escape from."
This is the problem with living in a techie bubble like HN. Meanwhile in the real world billions of people are happily using Windows and MacOS, and would have no idea what you're talking about.
You remind me of the dyed-in-the-wool Marxists I knew in the 80s sitting tight* waiting for capitalism to collapse, and those before them in the 20s and 30s. And those before them in the 19th Century. Still waiting. Any day now. The signs are everywhere.
* Almost literally. One friend at the time quit college to pick potatoes in Norfolk because when capitalism collapsed having practical skills would help him live off the land. That was about 1987. I wonder how he's doing.
This is the problem with living in a techie bubble like HN. Meanwhile in the real world billions of people are happily using Windows and MacOS, and would have no idea what you're talking about.
You remind me of the dyed-in-the-wool Marxists I knew in the 80s sitting tight* waiting for capitalism to collapse, and those before them in the 20s and 30s. And those before them in the 19th Century. Still waiting. Any day now. The signs are everywhere.
* Almost literally. One friend at the time quit college to pick potatoes in Norfolk because when capitalism collapsed having practical skills would help him live off the land. That was about 1987. I wonder how he's doing.
Well it does collapse right now, doesent it?
The Tax-idermy, were a society pushes ridiculous amounts of stabilization money into collapsing external peripheral "shell" societies who in return send refugee waves in convulsions, while slowly sinking into the civil/war/crime collapse accepting end-state is in full, brutally visible progress.
The politicians, leering for the authoritarian toolkit, because they doubt they can stabilize the mess that is to come.
How bad does it have to get, before you take a step back and acknowledge, that yes, this is un-subjective worser and even local recovery is unlikely, due to interconnected nature of global society and nature.
Sorry if things are bleak, but software seems to be one of the few levers i myself can pull towards a positive outcome, a better place, by allowing others to escape the dystopia of government eating the cooperated monopolies for societal control because government needs to be in control of something- anything and its definitely not in control of anything that would change outcomes.
The Tax-idermy, were a society pushes ridiculous amounts of stabilization money into collapsing external peripheral "shell" societies who in return send refugee waves in convulsions, while slowly sinking into the civil/war/crime collapse accepting end-state is in full, brutally visible progress.
The politicians, leering for the authoritarian toolkit, because they doubt they can stabilize the mess that is to come.
How bad does it have to get, before you take a step back and acknowledge, that yes, this is un-subjective worser and even local recovery is unlikely, due to interconnected nature of global society and nature.
Sorry if things are bleak, but software seems to be one of the few levers i myself can pull towards a positive outcome, a better place, by allowing others to escape the dystopia of government eating the cooperated monopolies for societal control because government needs to be in control of something- anything and its definitely not in control of anything that would change outcomes.
Put a pin in this and go back to it in 20 or 30 years, then look at how things actually worked out and ask yourself some questions. Was western civilisation actually collapsing? Were the things you though were most important, actually what drove politics and economies in the decades since? If you were wrong, what basic assumptions were you making that lead to that mistake, and what assumptions were the people making that got it right? Why is it they saw things more clearly?
You can actually do this right now. Go back and see what critics of the developed world economic systems were saying 30 years ago, or 50 years ago, or 150 years ago. What predictions were they making about growth and employment, what signs of failure did they see, and did those things actually matter in the long term? Doom mongering about the collapse of capitalism has a very, very, very long history.
You can actually do this right now. Go back and see what critics of the developed world economic systems were saying 30 years ago, or 50 years ago, or 150 years ago. What predictions were they making about growth and employment, what signs of failure did they see, and did those things actually matter in the long term? Doom mongering about the collapse of capitalism has a very, very, very long history.
Thanks for being a voice of reason on this. The world is too focused on scaremongering these days.
> One friend at the time quit college to pick potatoes in Norfolk because when capitalism collapsed having practical skills would help him live off the land. That was about 1987. I wonder how he's doing.
Please, please try to find out, and let us know!
Please, please try to find out, and let us know!
That's absolutely fine, I appreciate this view and I don't want my comment above to imply that your take on this is somehow wrong. The fact that desktop linux is this crazy fragmented anarchy of technologies and distros is fine. A lot of people get a lot of value out of it. It's not directly monetisable economic value and that's ok.
The top comment for you right now makes a snipe about hipsterism. Well yes, but that shouldn't be a pejorative. It's great that this ecosystem exists in all it's hipster geekery. It's a hobbyist community serving hobbyist and techno-geek purposes. We need that.
Where the cognitive dissonance comes in is thinking that this has anything whatever to do with mass appeal and serving the needs of ordinary non-technical users. That's a very different and in many ways mutually incompatible objective. What non-technical users need is a radically standardised, easy to use platform with a wide variety of highly compatible software and devices with solid QA, services and support. Only the commercial market has proved capable of providing these at anything like the scale needed because that means paying a lot of people to do these things every day as a job.
This is why mass market Linux projects like OLPC fail. They think 99% of the work has been done by the community already and they just need to package it up and deliver it to users. The problem is making all that work seamlessly and efficiently for users, developing a complete high quality product, delivering and selling it and building services around it is a huge ton of work. It's not 1%, it's more like 50% and you need people doing it day in, day out.
The top comment for you right now makes a snipe about hipsterism. Well yes, but that shouldn't be a pejorative. It's great that this ecosystem exists in all it's hipster geekery. It's a hobbyist community serving hobbyist and techno-geek purposes. We need that.
Where the cognitive dissonance comes in is thinking that this has anything whatever to do with mass appeal and serving the needs of ordinary non-technical users. That's a very different and in many ways mutually incompatible objective. What non-technical users need is a radically standardised, easy to use platform with a wide variety of highly compatible software and devices with solid QA, services and support. Only the commercial market has proved capable of providing these at anything like the scale needed because that means paying a lot of people to do these things every day as a job.
This is why mass market Linux projects like OLPC fail. They think 99% of the work has been done by the community already and they just need to package it up and deliver it to users. The problem is making all that work seamlessly and efficiently for users, developing a complete high quality product, delivering and selling it and building services around it is a huge ton of work. It's not 1%, it's more like 50% and you need people doing it day in, day out.
Linux has already succeeded in a way that makes it useful for commercial programs: Just as a layer below enterprise networking and SAAS.
This has already brought along the 'commercial parasites' that have spoiled the original experience, pushing in a thousand different directions with a thousand different things that need to be done quickly to meet business goals, elegance, clarity, and simplicity be damned.
This has already brought along the 'commercial parasites' that have spoiled the original experience, pushing in a thousand different directions with a thousand different things that need to be done quickly to meet business goals, elegance, clarity, and simplicity be damned.
[deleted]
work on linux, daily driver is windows. how exactly to these commercial parasites 'spoil the original experience'? Sure theres preinstalled bloatware and telemetry, but you still have root access and I have had no problem tinkering to have my setup to do what I want how I want, probably much less than what I would have to do to reach parity on a linux system.
Has this happened to macos? I don't get that impression. It has other problems, but not that.
You mean that operating system that creators of digital content would swear by? The one that you would pretty much have to own if you were going to run Photoshop or a whole raft of other creative pieces of software? The one that developers preferred?
That one is 90% gone and Apple will likely kill off the remainder before long. They're in the consumer gadgets business now, that there is accidentally a computer in there somewhere is more of a historical artifact than the main business driver. It's all about eco-systems and lock in, not about productivity or creativity.
That one is 90% gone and Apple will likely kill off the remainder before long. They're in the consumer gadgets business now, that there is accidentally a computer in there somewhere is more of a historical artifact than the main business driver. It's all about eco-systems and lock in, not about productivity or creativity.
>That one is 90% gone
You'd be surprised. Creatives aren't going anywhere...
The stories of its imminent death are just that stories. 1 for every 1000 users who remain and 100 than come in.
You'd be surprised. Creatives aren't going anywhere...
The stories of its imminent death are just that stories. 1 for every 1000 users who remain and 100 than come in.
I ditched Apple and Microsoft. Grass is greener on the other side. Latest documentary is done entirely on Linux.
Plus someone has to write the software used by those creatives.
>That one is 90% gone
Citation needed...?
Everything you've listed still works and works very well on macOS.
Citation needed...?
Everything you've listed still works and works very well on macOS.
Twenty years ago, the Mac version of Photoshop was just better than the Windows version. That hasn't been true in a while. And then you don't have to choose between a Mini which doesn't have enough cores, an iMac which tops out at a 27" monitor when you can get a PC with a 32" monitor (or a 40" or 80" or 17" or whatever you want), or a Mac Pro which starts at $6000.
Developers used to prefer Mac because it was Unix when the UI on every other Unix-like was bad. Now the UI on Linux is better than it used to be, and Windows has WSL et al, and Mac is full of "pay for a license annually and deal with code signing nonsense" that developers hate.
Developers used to prefer Mac because it was Unix when the UI on every other Unix-like was bad. Now the UI on Linux is better than it used to be, and Windows has WSL et al, and Mac is full of "pay for a license annually and deal with code signing nonsense" that developers hate.
Twenty years ago was 2001: the days of Photoshop versions 6.5–7. The Mac (OS 9) and Windows (2000) versions were all but indistinguishable, and Apple had just released OS X which was still a slow and buggy mess, not yet used by creative professionals.
If you said Photoshop 3.0 was clearly better on Mac System 7 than Windows 3.1 in 1994, you might have a point (that was before my time using Photoshop or Windows, so I can’t comment).
If you said Photoshop 3.0 was clearly better on Mac System 7 than Windows 3.1 in 1994, you might have a point (that was before my time using Photoshop or Windows, so I can’t comment).
>Twenty years ago, the Mac version of Photoshop was just better than the Windows version. That hasn't been true in a while.
I've used both (PS on macOS/Windows) recently and find them to be more or less equivalent. Given the choice of using macOS or Windows, I'd still take macOS.
Not sure what the point of your line re: hardware is when a standard M1 Mini runs very well for this use case. If you want a bigger monitor... just buy the bigger monitor with a Mini.
>Now the UI on Linux is better than it used to be
I ran Desktop Linux for years before going macOS, and I check in periodically. I remain unimpressed, it's still a jumbled mess of an ecosystem. UI is also not the stumbling block to Linux adoption - hardware support alone, while better, still isn't up to what you get with the big two.
>and Windows has WSL et al
This is a fair point, and was an incredibly smart thing for MSFT to do.
>and Mac is full of "pay for a license annually and deal with code signing nonsense" that developers hate.
Have you ever code signed anything elsewhere, where you buy certs and such? It costs money. Apple's setup is a flat $100/year and "just works". This is also only if you're shipping software, you can run homebrew/etc just fine if you're doing dev work - there's tons of developers working on macOS who never pay Apple the $100/year for membership.
Can you actually refute what I'm saying, which is that macOS is still very usable by developers? The OP I responded to originally is claiming that the macOS devs loved is "90% gone", but outside of HN/Reddit echo chambers I don't see people switching en-masse.
I've used both (PS on macOS/Windows) recently and find them to be more or less equivalent. Given the choice of using macOS or Windows, I'd still take macOS.
Not sure what the point of your line re: hardware is when a standard M1 Mini runs very well for this use case. If you want a bigger monitor... just buy the bigger monitor with a Mini.
>Now the UI on Linux is better than it used to be
I ran Desktop Linux for years before going macOS, and I check in periodically. I remain unimpressed, it's still a jumbled mess of an ecosystem. UI is also not the stumbling block to Linux adoption - hardware support alone, while better, still isn't up to what you get with the big two.
>and Windows has WSL et al
This is a fair point, and was an incredibly smart thing for MSFT to do.
>and Mac is full of "pay for a license annually and deal with code signing nonsense" that developers hate.
Have you ever code signed anything elsewhere, where you buy certs and such? It costs money. Apple's setup is a flat $100/year and "just works". This is also only if you're shipping software, you can run homebrew/etc just fine if you're doing dev work - there's tons of developers working on macOS who never pay Apple the $100/year for membership.
Can you actually refute what I'm saying, which is that macOS is still very usable by developers? The OP I responded to originally is claiming that the macOS devs loved is "90% gone", but outside of HN/Reddit echo chambers I don't see people switching en-masse.
Apple's codesigning "just works" as long as you stick to XCode. Outside XCode it's extremely esoteric and opaque.
But to Apple's credit, it can be done, and done using the native toolset. It took me awhile, but my relatively simple Makefile is building fat binaries (x86_64 + arm64), building and signing the application package, submitting the package for signing, and stapling certificates. Not monolithically--it's not a giant shell script posing as a Makefile. I have proper, correctly defined build dependencies for every real target up to `make submit`. So `make submit` will effectively build and submit a package both from a fresh checkout, as well as incrementally from an existing tree where only a few object files need rebuilding. But `make submit` and `make staple` themselves are .PHONY targets; they're not idempotent, but invoking them multiple times is still benign.
But to Apple's credit, it can be done, and done using the native toolset. It took me awhile, but my relatively simple Makefile is building fat binaries (x86_64 + arm64), building and signing the application package, submitting the package for signing, and stapling certificates. Not monolithically--it's not a giant shell script posing as a Makefile. I have proper, correctly defined build dependencies for every real target up to `make submit`. So `make submit` will effectively build and submit a package both from a fresh checkout, as well as incrementally from an existing tree where only a few object files need rebuilding. But `make submit` and `make staple` themselves are .PHONY targets; they're not idempotent, but invoking them multiple times is still benign.
I implemented the codesigning and notarization process for Slippi, which is a Dolphin Emulator fork... based on CMake.
I would not call it esoteric and/or opaque. It's one or two shell scripts and an API key through App Connect for the notarization pass.
I would not call it esoteric and/or opaque. It's one or two shell scripts and an API key through App Connect for the notarization pass.
It's certainly esoteric if you're trying to diagnose entitlement issues. It's all poorly documented. Some of the documentation on the Apple website is flat out wrong, for example recommendations on signing multiple separate binaries, each requiring an entitlement (spoiler: there's exactly one app id per package (EDIT: per bundle), and exactly one executable that can use that app id for entitlements, so the documentation was recommending a method of accomplishing something that is simply impossible, which explains why it never worked).
Once you figure things out, it's not nearly as bad. The tools can work well. And that's hugely valuable. But documentation and consistency are significantly worse than common open source projects. And at least with open source you can also resort to looking at the code to figure things out. I find myself constantly doing that for Keychain, actually. Fortunately older versions of Apple's Security.framework are open source, which helps me diagnose and analyze API usage problems. Want to figure out how to retrieve the usage constraints (i.e. SecAccessControlCreateFlags) used to generate a T2 Secure Enclave private key? Or even simpler, want to figure out if its even possible to derive those constraints? Only the code is going to tell you.
Once you figure things out, it's not nearly as bad. The tools can work well. And that's hugely valuable. But documentation and consistency are significantly worse than common open source projects. And at least with open source you can also resort to looking at the code to figure things out. I find myself constantly doing that for Keychain, actually. Fortunately older versions of Apple's Security.framework are open source, which helps me diagnose and analyze API usage problems. Want to figure out how to retrieve the usage constraints (i.e. SecAccessControlCreateFlags) used to generate a T2 Secure Enclave private key? Or even simpler, want to figure out if its even possible to derive those constraints? Only the code is going to tell you.
Have you, or do you intend to write a blog post about your process? Could help other devs working on Macs.
I agree on the code signing. I wrote an app in LispWorks Common Lisp, and other people use the same for apps for the Apple Store, I ended up just rewriting it in Swift and SwiftUI because that made dealing with the Apple Store so much easier.
> hardware support alone, while better, still isn't up to what you get with the big two.
Ugh, not this again.
Apple's hardware support is fine because they only have to support a few bits of hardware. Microsoft's hardware support is fine because everyone (aside from Apple) sells their laptops preinstalled with Windows, and so of course they design them with Windows in mind, and test to make sure things work.
Linux's hardware support is also fine, if you buy your hardware with the intent to run Linux on it and look for something that's supported well, or buy something the manufacturer has built with Linux support in mind. All the "Linux hardware support is bad" stuff comes from people who already have a random Windows laptop or Mac and decide they want to run Linux on it, despite the fact that if they just did a quick web search they'd find a list of problems with their hardware.
Saying Linux's hardware support isn't good enough is like saying macOS's hardware support is not good enough, because you tried to run macOS on a random HP laptop. Run an OS on hardware that it supports well and your experience will be fine.
> UI is also not the stumbling block to Linux adoption
I agree that it's not the stumbling block, but it's a big one. The GNOME developers seem to like to completely change everything often, and break a bunch of things in the process. I don't know much about KDE; last time I tried it was in the late 90s. Xfce (which I use) is ridiculously stable (it's hardly changed at all in the 15+ years I've used it, and I think that's a good thing), but it's built by a very small team, and so it's always a bit behind on polish and covering all tasks with GUI tools. But I love it[0], and it works well and stays out of my way.
The other major stumbling block is commercial software distribution. Go check out a commercial software package's website, and unless it's Electron- or Java-based, you'll see one download each for Windows and Mac, and 10 different downloads for various distros and versions of Linux (if you're lucky!). I would hate to be the person who manages releases for all that.
I don't particularly mind, though: most of the software I use is open source and in my distro's package manager, and the few commercial apps I have work fine (because I run Debian, and most commercial apps will have a Debian download, or at least an Ubuntu one that can be made to work without much trouble). But that's just me, and an average user wouldn't want to put up with this.
Honestly, I'm afraid that too much desktop popularity would destroy Linux (and turn it into the ad-laden garbage that is Windows or the increasingly-locked-down prison that is macOS). I'm fairly happy with its current popularity, where hardware support and software availability are good enough for my purposes, but without the platform becoming too commercialized.
[0] Full disclosure: I was an Xfce core developer for 5 years in the aughts, so I'm a bit biased.
Ugh, not this again.
Apple's hardware support is fine because they only have to support a few bits of hardware. Microsoft's hardware support is fine because everyone (aside from Apple) sells their laptops preinstalled with Windows, and so of course they design them with Windows in mind, and test to make sure things work.
Linux's hardware support is also fine, if you buy your hardware with the intent to run Linux on it and look for something that's supported well, or buy something the manufacturer has built with Linux support in mind. All the "Linux hardware support is bad" stuff comes from people who already have a random Windows laptop or Mac and decide they want to run Linux on it, despite the fact that if they just did a quick web search they'd find a list of problems with their hardware.
Saying Linux's hardware support isn't good enough is like saying macOS's hardware support is not good enough, because you tried to run macOS on a random HP laptop. Run an OS on hardware that it supports well and your experience will be fine.
> UI is also not the stumbling block to Linux adoption
I agree that it's not the stumbling block, but it's a big one. The GNOME developers seem to like to completely change everything often, and break a bunch of things in the process. I don't know much about KDE; last time I tried it was in the late 90s. Xfce (which I use) is ridiculously stable (it's hardly changed at all in the 15+ years I've used it, and I think that's a good thing), but it's built by a very small team, and so it's always a bit behind on polish and covering all tasks with GUI tools. But I love it[0], and it works well and stays out of my way.
The other major stumbling block is commercial software distribution. Go check out a commercial software package's website, and unless it's Electron- or Java-based, you'll see one download each for Windows and Mac, and 10 different downloads for various distros and versions of Linux (if you're lucky!). I would hate to be the person who manages releases for all that.
I don't particularly mind, though: most of the software I use is open source and in my distro's package manager, and the few commercial apps I have work fine (because I run Debian, and most commercial apps will have a Debian download, or at least an Ubuntu one that can be made to work without much trouble). But that's just me, and an average user wouldn't want to put up with this.
Honestly, I'm afraid that too much desktop popularity would destroy Linux (and turn it into the ad-laden garbage that is Windows or the increasingly-locked-down prison that is macOS). I'm fairly happy with its current popularity, where hardware support and software availability are good enough for my purposes, but without the platform becoming too commercialized.
[0] Full disclosure: I was an Xfce core developer for 5 years in the aughts, so I'm a bit biased.
Take a look at KDE again, won't hurt. I switched to openSUSE Tumbleweed (best integration IMO, since its their standard DE since forever plus rolling release and btrfs snapshots on upgrades) from Cinnamon on Mint. KDE connect was the app that made me give it a try, more than happy with it. The devs made resource usage a priority, nowadays it rivals and sometimes surpasses XFCE which got heavier in the meantime.
> hardware support alone, while better, still isn't up to what you get with the big two.
I recently bought a Huion tablet only after checking that it works on Linux.
Install on Linux couldn't be easier: plug the thing and ready to work, pressure detection and all.
I did the same on Windows. It got detected, Windows told me that it was downloading the drivers, and after 10 seconds it worked... kind of. Any trace waited like 1 second to start drawing, and long pressure was a secondary click. What!? How can anybody draw with this? Pressure didn't work, it just worked as the mouse. Time to search: disable something called "windows ink", but directly in the register so it doesn't re-enable on boot. Ok, the secondary button issue gone, but the delayed draw still there. Maybe some stabilizer? Disable Krita stabilizer... Nope. Go to Huion web page, download an app to configure the pen: windows ink still enabled some how, the app allows you to disable it for real. Pressure still unseen. More tweaks on the app... Yes, finally, after two hours the tablet behaves just like in Linux after two seconds, and I only have to keep open a third party app that is probably calling home, just to avoid Windows to mess things up again.
Yes, hardware is a breeze in Windows, except when it isn't.
I recently bought a Huion tablet only after checking that it works on Linux.
Install on Linux couldn't be easier: plug the thing and ready to work, pressure detection and all.
I did the same on Windows. It got detected, Windows told me that it was downloading the drivers, and after 10 seconds it worked... kind of. Any trace waited like 1 second to start drawing, and long pressure was a secondary click. What!? How can anybody draw with this? Pressure didn't work, it just worked as the mouse. Time to search: disable something called "windows ink", but directly in the register so it doesn't re-enable on boot. Ok, the secondary button issue gone, but the delayed draw still there. Maybe some stabilizer? Disable Krita stabilizer... Nope. Go to Huion web page, download an app to configure the pen: windows ink still enabled some how, the app allows you to disable it for real. Pressure still unseen. More tweaks on the app... Yes, finally, after two hours the tablet behaves just like in Linux after two seconds, and I only have to keep open a third party app that is probably calling home, just to avoid Windows to mess things up again.
Yes, hardware is a breeze in Windows, except when it isn't.
> I've used both (PS on macOS/Windows) recently and find them to be more or less equivalent. Given the choice of using macOS or Windows, I'd still take macOS.
Of course you would, because macOS is better than Windows. That has always been the case. But then you have to deal with Apple's hardware segmentation strategy.
> Not sure what the point of your line re: hardware is when a standard M1 Mini runs very well for this use case. If you want a bigger monitor... just buy the bigger monitor with a Mini.
The M1 Mini has 4+4 cores. Creative work typically involves software that will use arbitrarily many cores, and on that kind of workload the M1 compares quite disfavorably with 16+ core x64 processors. If you want a Mac with the equivalent processing power of a Ryzen 9 5950X, you're paying $8000+ for a 16-core Mac Pro.
Which they do on purpose so that people doing professional work don't buy the Mini.
And it's the same problem for developers for the same reason. Compiling a big project on a 4+4 core machine is a lot slower than doing it on a 64-core Threadripper, but you can't even get a 64-core Mac.
> I ran Desktop Linux for years before going macOS, and I check in periodically. I remain unimpressed, it's still a jumbled mess of an ecosystem. UI is also not the stumbling block to Linux adoption
Many years ago the UI on Linux systems was basically unusable. It was the stumbling block to Linux adoption.
Now it's "good enough" and the stumbling block is... nothing. Millions of regular people have a Chromebook (i.e. Linux) and they use it just fine, and there is nothing superior about ChromeOS over Ubuntu et al, it just has a bigger corporation marketing it.
> Have you ever code signed anything elsewhere, where you buy certs and such? It costs money.
You're comparing it to alternatives which are also a pain in the butt, when the better alternative is to not do it at all because it's totally useless.
They'll give basically anybody who pays a code signing cert. A nobody who nobody trusts for anything can get one. Attackers can steal one from any of the millions of people who were forced to get one. So it's not providing any trust at all, so it's completely pointless, but it's still paying money and wasting time for no benefit.
> Can you actually refute what I'm saying, which is that macOS is still very usable by developers?
It's not that you literally can't use it. It's that it's worse now than the alternatives. And it's also worse now than it used to be. It would be hard to beat Snow Leopard on a modern 64-core workstation, but you can't get that anywhere. And the closest thing is the same workstation running Linux.
Of course you would, because macOS is better than Windows. That has always been the case. But then you have to deal with Apple's hardware segmentation strategy.
> Not sure what the point of your line re: hardware is when a standard M1 Mini runs very well for this use case. If you want a bigger monitor... just buy the bigger monitor with a Mini.
The M1 Mini has 4+4 cores. Creative work typically involves software that will use arbitrarily many cores, and on that kind of workload the M1 compares quite disfavorably with 16+ core x64 processors. If you want a Mac with the equivalent processing power of a Ryzen 9 5950X, you're paying $8000+ for a 16-core Mac Pro.
Which they do on purpose so that people doing professional work don't buy the Mini.
And it's the same problem for developers for the same reason. Compiling a big project on a 4+4 core machine is a lot slower than doing it on a 64-core Threadripper, but you can't even get a 64-core Mac.
> I ran Desktop Linux for years before going macOS, and I check in periodically. I remain unimpressed, it's still a jumbled mess of an ecosystem. UI is also not the stumbling block to Linux adoption
Many years ago the UI on Linux systems was basically unusable. It was the stumbling block to Linux adoption.
Now it's "good enough" and the stumbling block is... nothing. Millions of regular people have a Chromebook (i.e. Linux) and they use it just fine, and there is nothing superior about ChromeOS over Ubuntu et al, it just has a bigger corporation marketing it.
> Have you ever code signed anything elsewhere, where you buy certs and such? It costs money.
You're comparing it to alternatives which are also a pain in the butt, when the better alternative is to not do it at all because it's totally useless.
They'll give basically anybody who pays a code signing cert. A nobody who nobody trusts for anything can get one. Attackers can steal one from any of the millions of people who were forced to get one. So it's not providing any trust at all, so it's completely pointless, but it's still paying money and wasting time for no benefit.
> Can you actually refute what I'm saying, which is that macOS is still very usable by developers?
It's not that you literally can't use it. It's that it's worse now than the alternatives. And it's also worse now than it used to be. It would be hard to beat Snow Leopard on a modern 64-core workstation, but you can't get that anywhere. And the closest thing is the same workstation running Linux.
apple revenue 2009 $42.7 billion
mac revenue 2009 $13.6 billion(30%)
apple ""2014 $182.6 billion
service""2014 $17.8 billion(%9.8)
mac "" 2014 $23.9 billion(13%)
apple "" 2020 $274.3 billion
service "" 2020 $53.6 billion (19%)
mac "" 2020 $28.4 billion(10%)
edit"Spanish"
from key product to small fish, now sell service to your mac is mor key than selling the mac itself and ipad pro whit magic keyboard is mor expensive than the mac air.
>That one is 90% gone and Apple will likely kill off the remainder before long. They're in the consumer gadgets business now, that there is accidentally a computer in there somewhere is more of a historical artifact than the main business driver. It's all about eco-systems and lock in, not about productivity or creativity.
Huge disagree, the 2021 MBP's that will launch later this year will bring back lots of creatives. Digital Content is going to scream on ARM Macs. I think Apple Sillicon has brought back a renewed focus on the Mac and performance and customers will follow.
Huge disagree, the 2021 MBP's that will launch later this year will bring back lots of creatives. Digital Content is going to scream on ARM Macs. I think Apple Sillicon has brought back a renewed focus on the Mac and performance and customers will follow.
That seems like a much different problem! Apple is mismanaging, but it has nothing to do with the commercial parasites theory that was mentioned as the idea in this thread(?)
With the increasing convergence of macOS and iOS, we're surely on the way. Already it's true that the app mindset has encouraged a lot of the wonderful free software I loved on the Mac to become paid.
(Which, (1) of course is the creator's right, but I still miss the old mindset, and (2) "why not just keep using the old software?" doesn't work because Apple's commitment to backward compatibility is, umm, not high.)
(Which, (1) of course is the creator's right, but I still miss the old mindset, and (2) "why not just keep using the old software?" doesn't work because Apple's commitment to backward compatibility is, umm, not high.)
You seem to have misspelled "nonexistent" at the end there.
Also their moving Big Brother onto the iPhone is a pretty good sign where they are taking all of their systems. No, I don't want my computer spying on me for the sake of my government. Not so much because I think that they will do me wrong, as because it provides a way to target inconvenient people who I don't want targeted. (Think Snowden.)
Also their moving Big Brother onto the iPhone is a pretty good sign where they are taking all of their systems. No, I don't want my computer spying on me for the sake of my government. Not so much because I think that they will do me wrong, as because it provides a way to target inconvenient people who I don't want targeted. (Think Snowden.)
Don’t forget MacOS last year or so, would bypass firewalls and VPNs, and Apple said “oops”. That was probably is a hook that was accidentally exposed.
You’ve correctly observed that success can bring unpleasant side effects. I think it’s too late to save Linux from this. It is used by all manner of parasites. The tracking bugs that slow down the web and invade our privacy? They are quite often backed by Linux. The Android OS that allows Google to follow users’ every last movement, web search, and email? Linux. Database servers at Facebook, Google, and any number of data brokers? Linux.
I am not saying this makes Linux bad. What I am saying is, making it easier to charge for software is not going to “spoil” Linux with commercial parasites. If anything, paid software could help undermine the surveillance economy by providing a more direct way to support the creation of good software that doesn’t spy on you, like the default Google Android apps or the Google web apps many people use on Linux desktops. All that stuff is commercial too, you just don’t pay for it in money, and maybe the source code is open, but you darn sure pay with your personal data.
I am not saying this makes Linux bad. What I am saying is, making it easier to charge for software is not going to “spoil” Linux with commercial parasites. If anything, paid software could help undermine the surveillance economy by providing a more direct way to support the creation of good software that doesn’t spy on you, like the default Google Android apps or the Google web apps many people use on Linux desktops. All that stuff is commercial too, you just don’t pay for it in money, and maybe the source code is open, but you darn sure pay with your personal data.
This is gibberish. The discussion topic is about what happens on your Linux distribution that runs on your hardware. The fact that other parties are using Linux for user-hostile purposes says nothing except that Linux is a successful technology. And like all technology since fire was first controlled by humans, it has been used for good and evil.
What most people think of as Linus is really GNU/Linux, and while I don't think the distinction usually needs to be made, it's actually important in this case because it makes it obvious there is no one "thing" to infect and change. Linux is a commodity, and open, and we're in no threat of major problems like that than we are of someone jacking up the price on ibuprofen. The solution is the same in both cases, someone else will offer a better alternative because there's nothing forcing you to use the bad offering.
[deleted]
I totally agree with this. This may be an unpopular opinion, but I feel like Electron is really helping here. I've been a Mac user since 2003, but built an Ubuntu based desktop recently. The fact that I can run Figma, VSCode, Slack, etc. means it's actually a workable solution. I know Electron is slow, but I don't think producing native software for Linux is economically viable or commercially interesting for a lot of companies. But if a company is building with Electron, I get the impression that it's not a lot of extra work to support Linux and it means the platform actually gets an app. Ironically, I think this will make Linux a more reasonable choice for day to day work and will eventually result in increasing the economic viability of producing software for the platform.
Wasn't Java supposed to solve the platform problem?
Java was supposed to "write once, run anywhere". Instead it became write once, debug anywhere.
Personally, I wish PWAs were generally better supported so I could skip the Electron bit and could install the same app on my phone. Being a part of the main browser gives better resource handling, better sandboxing that Electron allows but I would prefer most apps didn't have, and access to the extensions I want. Too bad Firefox killed off SSB (site-specific browser) before it even launched.
That would work for Slack and Spotify, but not for VSCode. PWAs can't get file system access as far as I know.
PWAs have limitations, yes. But you just mentioned how 2 of the biggest Electron users could not use Electron without sacrificing much if anything.
I think once you're in this other territory then you should consider full native instead of Electron. Why you choose to use an editor housed in a browser engine with tracking baked into the application is your decision. There are plenty of other native editors, both GUI and TUI, a user can choose.
I think once you're in this other territory then you should consider full native instead of Electron. Why you choose to use an editor housed in a browser engine with tracking baked into the application is your decision. There are plenty of other native editors, both GUI and TUI, a user can choose.
Nobody chooses VSCode specifically because it's in Electron, we choose it because it's a good editor.
Any app can send network requests, so any app can incorporate tracking. This has nothing to do with Electron either.
But to your original point: yes, the more Electron apps that are really just web apps and can be gotten as PWAs, the better.
Any app can send network requests, so any app can incorporate tracking. This has nothing to do with Electron either.
But to your original point: yes, the more Electron apps that are really just web apps and can be gotten as PWAs, the better.
PWA's only work when you are connected to the intenet for most of the time. Which is not guranteed on mobile. It is fine for some apps which need a connection to be usable like a messaging or a banking app. But others like productivity apps are useless. Sometimes the browser crashes on mobile as well.
At that point might as well make an app.
At that point might as well make an app.
I'd say my non-browser apps crash more than the browser.
Offline is one of the biggest reasons to ship a full PWA. This is what service workers are for. The biggest reason to not ship a PWA is Apple barely supports them and you can't siphon as much user data if sandboxed in the browser.
I would LOVE if I could get a basic PWA from my bank that didn't have all of these permissions like trying to read if I'm rooted or not, location access, storage -- none of their business what I do with my device or where I am -- and I could still scan QR codes, check balance, do transfers.
Offline is one of the biggest reasons to ship a full PWA. This is what service workers are for. The biggest reason to not ship a PWA is Apple barely supports them and you can't siphon as much user data if sandboxed in the browser.
I would LOVE if I could get a basic PWA from my bank that didn't have all of these permissions like trying to read if I'm rooted or not, location access, storage -- none of their business what I do with my device or where I am -- and I could still scan QR codes, check balance, do transfers.
I love to hate electron. We all groan about it. But it does bring critical apps I use every day to my desktop.
I wish these multi-billion dollar companies like Slack could stomach real native clients, sure they can afford it at a barely noticeable hit to profit, but I’ll take it ya know.
I agree and think that web apps and the SaaS model in general help Desktop Linux adoption a lot.
Office 365 provides good enough Web Apps to get by without having a native Office installation. I don't have any commercial Desktop Software that I'd need specifically for my work: CRM, issue tracker, Documentation, Figma,... - all available in the Browser.
Office 365 provides good enough Web Apps to get by without having a native Office installation. I don't have any commercial Desktop Software that I'd need specifically for my work: CRM, issue tracker, Documentation, Figma,... - all available in the Browser.
I release maintain a small commercial open-source app (partner app for a piece of open source hardware), and I don't think people understand how burdensome "proper" Linux binary distribution can be until they actually try it.
Linux accounts for about 5% of my users, and for whatever reason the community thought it would be a good idea to fragment that minority further into Arch users, Debian users, CentOS users, OpenSUSE users, Ubuntu users (14, 16, 18 and 20, all with different glibc versions).
Modern tools like AppImage make this at least somewhat standard, but Windows has had sane, standardised installers for almost 3 decades now.
Linux accounts for about 5% of my users, and for whatever reason the community thought it would be a good idea to fragment that minority further into Arch users, Debian users, CentOS users, OpenSUSE users, Ubuntu users (14, 16, 18 and 20, all with different glibc versions).
Modern tools like AppImage make this at least somewhat standard, but Windows has had sane, standardised installers for almost 3 decades now.
The distribution form of open source software is as the name says source code.
[deleted]
How many users compile Firefox or LibreOffice themselves, rather than just downloading the binaries? And don’t even most users of popular package managers just install binary packages?
Installation is not the same as distribution.
All upstream packages that I am aware of distribute in source form.
Yes, and if you want to take this route you can either maintain your package yourself on every single major distro or deal with support tickets for issues that have either already been fixed in old versions or arise from strange interactions with dynamic libs.
If you want to draw the boundary that way, fine. But to me, the point of open source is that I can get the source code and compile it myself, if I want to and have the necessary resources to do so.
> I don't think people understand how burdensome "proper" Linux binary distribution can be until they actually try it.
I have and it's not really that different from what works on Windows: Compile against the base system you want to support and then ship your own libraries for all other dependencies, statically linking those that you can.
Could there be things to make this more convenient? Sure - one thing I'd love to see is for glibc to support a WINVER analogue to target older versions with the same installed headers. But that is only for convenience - you can just build on older (LTS) distros or assemble your own toolchain if you need newer compiler versions (not as hard as it sounds, there are plenty of resources out there).
> fragment that minority further into Arch users, Debian users, CentOS users, OpenSUSE users, Ubuntu users
How does this matter to binary software distributions? What Distro-specific issues have you encountered that weren't just Arch-has-a-newer-library-so-I-get-an-early-warning-for-compatibility-issues-that-Ubuntu-will-have-in-the-next version.
> all with different glibc versions
So? Compile against the oldest glibc you want to support. All newer ones are backwards compatible and will have no problem running your program.
> Modern tools like AppImage make this at least somewhat standard, but Windows has had sane, standardised installers for almost 3 decades now.
Linux theoretically also has a standard package format (RPM according to the LSB). But just like with MSI on Windows, people tend to roll their own thing for various reasons - and it really is not a problem at all.
I have and it's not really that different from what works on Windows: Compile against the base system you want to support and then ship your own libraries for all other dependencies, statically linking those that you can.
Could there be things to make this more convenient? Sure - one thing I'd love to see is for glibc to support a WINVER analogue to target older versions with the same installed headers. But that is only for convenience - you can just build on older (LTS) distros or assemble your own toolchain if you need newer compiler versions (not as hard as it sounds, there are plenty of resources out there).
> fragment that minority further into Arch users, Debian users, CentOS users, OpenSUSE users, Ubuntu users
How does this matter to binary software distributions? What Distro-specific issues have you encountered that weren't just Arch-has-a-newer-library-so-I-get-an-early-warning-for-compatibility-issues-that-Ubuntu-will-have-in-the-next version.
> all with different glibc versions
So? Compile against the oldest glibc you want to support. All newer ones are backwards compatible and will have no problem running your program.
> Modern tools like AppImage make this at least somewhat standard, but Windows has had sane, standardised installers for almost 3 decades now.
Linux theoretically also has a standard package format (RPM according to the LSB). But just like with MSI on Windows, people tend to roll their own thing for various reasons - and it really is not a problem at all.
I'm not denying your experience, but I'm assuming the first time you tried it you either had help from someone who had done it before or a much better understanding of the pitfalls of software distribution than I did.
For me, I compiled a binary on my Windows machine, manually put it into an MSI alongside the the required VC++ redistributable, and it worked out of the box on every single system from Vista through to current version Windows 10 (and probably 11 too) - x86 and x64, with no issues whatsoever. If I had used the XP-compatible version of VS2015 I could have targeted that too.
Similar story for Mac (although distribution there has since become a minor pain in the arse with code signing and notarisation).
For Linux, I built a .deb manually on Ubuntu 16.04, specified the dependencies just like with Windows and uploaded it. Obviously this crashed violently on most things that weren't modern (for the time) and Ubuntu-based.
In the end, I fixed it exactly as you suggested - I built on an older LTS distro (on a CI server by this stage), shipped all of my own libraries and aggressively made sure that it would load those versions and only those versions. This still required some random hack to work on certain modern systems, as it needed a hack to support both modern glibc and a compatibility version bundled with the app.
These days, I could get a reliable Linux release up in a heartbeat, but this is only after learning the details of a fickle system through multiple iterations of user interaction.
For me, I compiled a binary on my Windows machine, manually put it into an MSI alongside the the required VC++ redistributable, and it worked out of the box on every single system from Vista through to current version Windows 10 (and probably 11 too) - x86 and x64, with no issues whatsoever. If I had used the XP-compatible version of VS2015 I could have targeted that too.
Similar story for Mac (although distribution there has since become a minor pain in the arse with code signing and notarisation).
For Linux, I built a .deb manually on Ubuntu 16.04, specified the dependencies just like with Windows and uploaded it. Obviously this crashed violently on most things that weren't modern (for the time) and Ubuntu-based.
In the end, I fixed it exactly as you suggested - I built on an older LTS distro (on a CI server by this stage), shipped all of my own libraries and aggressively made sure that it would load those versions and only those versions. This still required some random hack to work on certain modern systems, as it needed a hack to support both modern glibc and a compatibility version bundled with the app.
These days, I could get a reliable Linux release up in a heartbeat, but this is only after learning the details of a fickle system through multiple iterations of user interaction.
The issue isn't that Linux lacks proprietary applications. Its that Linux development focuses on apps that appeal to people who write code and this means Linux has a highly technical userbase that prefers open source software.
If Linux desktops had a critical mass of users that were willing to buy proprietary software, the proprietary software companies would make Linux software for the same reason that game development companies make games for Nintendo's underpowered gaming hardware if it sells well (but don't if it ends up flopping like the Wii U).
To get to that critical mass, Linux desktop needs something that Mac and Windows don't offer that appeals to the average non-technical computer user. The single best opportunity for Linux was when Microsoft came out with Windows 8 with its awful new "Metro" interface. If a Linux distro had a GUI that was at least as good as Windows 7, out of the box support for Windows applications, drivers that just work and major OEMs willing to sell it preinstalled at the time, it would have drawn Windows users. Right now, thanks to Valve's efforts at getting Windows games to run on Linux, the Steam Deck is likely to be the most commercially successful GNU+Linux computer ever made because it can run most of your Windows Steam library and gaming is the main reason consumers buy Windows these days (the needs of low end consumers who just want to read email and be spied on by Facebook are best served with an iPad or Chromebook).
Linux is, on the surface, a much more appealing platform than iOS or Android for developers because there's no monopoly app store taking a 30% cut and demanding you take features out of your software. Its also more appealing than Mac because there's no Gatekeeper program that you have to take extra steps to get around. Developers tolerate these practices because the users are on those platforms and especially because Apple products tend to sell to wealthier people who are more willing to spend money on software than Android or Windows users (let alone Linux users who are generally believers in open source and some of whom are "free software" advocates who agree with RMS's views on the immorality of proprietary software). Ultimately, software companies will go where the users are. Platforms don't have to cater to them. They have to attract the users which forces the software companies to release their software for the platform. When you focus on making a platform that appeals to software companies instead of users, you end up with the Epic Games Store which has lots of software but few users.
If Linux desktops had a critical mass of users that were willing to buy proprietary software, the proprietary software companies would make Linux software for the same reason that game development companies make games for Nintendo's underpowered gaming hardware if it sells well (but don't if it ends up flopping like the Wii U).
To get to that critical mass, Linux desktop needs something that Mac and Windows don't offer that appeals to the average non-technical computer user. The single best opportunity for Linux was when Microsoft came out with Windows 8 with its awful new "Metro" interface. If a Linux distro had a GUI that was at least as good as Windows 7, out of the box support for Windows applications, drivers that just work and major OEMs willing to sell it preinstalled at the time, it would have drawn Windows users. Right now, thanks to Valve's efforts at getting Windows games to run on Linux, the Steam Deck is likely to be the most commercially successful GNU+Linux computer ever made because it can run most of your Windows Steam library and gaming is the main reason consumers buy Windows these days (the needs of low end consumers who just want to read email and be spied on by Facebook are best served with an iPad or Chromebook).
Linux is, on the surface, a much more appealing platform than iOS or Android for developers because there's no monopoly app store taking a 30% cut and demanding you take features out of your software. Its also more appealing than Mac because there's no Gatekeeper program that you have to take extra steps to get around. Developers tolerate these practices because the users are on those platforms and especially because Apple products tend to sell to wealthier people who are more willing to spend money on software than Android or Windows users (let alone Linux users who are generally believers in open source and some of whom are "free software" advocates who agree with RMS's views on the immorality of proprietary software). Ultimately, software companies will go where the users are. Platforms don't have to cater to them. They have to attract the users which forces the software companies to release their software for the platform. When you focus on making a platform that appeals to software companies instead of users, you end up with the Epic Games Store which has lots of software but few users.
As a highly technical person that writes code, does media, and fixes high-level computer networks and essential systems, the last thing I want is to have to dig into mysterious config files and have to debug every little thing that goes wrong with installing a piece of software. I can give up a certain degree of control and customization in exchange for a stable operating system and desktop environment that lets me get my work done. This is why I use macOS for the desktop.
This. If my entire workflow were codewriting, I'd be thrilled to go over to a Linux desktop and never look back. Unfortunately about 30% of my work is dependent on being able to work with assets in Adobe formats (including compiling and maintaining older Air apps). On top of that, one thing that "just works" on the Mac is peripheral setup. Audio interfaces, Wacom tablets, printers... plug and play. I'm
not sure I could make every peripheral I use work under Ubuntu, but even researching it quickly turns into a days long quest on various vendors' message boards. On the other hand I am deeply, deeply angry about what Apple is doing, and I'm not going to buy any new Apple hardware unless they reverse course on this privacy violation. If I have to deal with all the headaches of Linux and keep an old Apple around just for compiling old stuff or recording music, so be it.
[edit] I'd like to add that my private devices have been exclusively on Mac since the Mac SE around 1992, my company is exclusively on Mac, my clients buy Macs for internal use because we write their internal apps for them, and overall I've been responsible for purchasing somewhere around 100 Macs. I know they don't care and have never cared about my opinion as a customer, but their interests aligned with mine. Now they appear not to.
[edit] I'd like to add that my private devices have been exclusively on Mac since the Mac SE around 1992, my company is exclusively on Mac, my clients buy Macs for internal use because we write their internal apps for them, and overall I've been responsible for purchasing somewhere around 100 Macs. I know they don't care and have never cared about my opinion as a customer, but their interests aligned with mine. Now they appear not to.
Even if my entire workflow were code writing, I'd want to focus on my own code and not on the code and configs underpinning my system
Amen to this. I fell in love with the Mac in 2007 after literally hating the company for the prior 17 years due to a weird form of PTSD from having to make that chatty bastard AppleTalk behave on corporate networks.
I became a convert because it just worked. I didn’t need to constantly mess with it to keep it running well. So well that my 2008 MBP lasted until 2018 until the battery swelled and cracked the case. I’m now 3 years into a MBA and this will prob carry me through to retirement.
I became a convert because it just worked. I didn’t need to constantly mess with it to keep it running well. So well that my 2008 MBP lasted until 2018 until the battery swelled and cracked the case. I’m now 3 years into a MBA and this will prob carry me through to retirement.
Actually with a modern Ubuntu like 20.04 there are not many issues at all. With 14.04 and 16.04, yes, it could be a bit rough with some graphics issues with some Java based programs, drivers etc.
Comparing Ubuntu 20.04 with my wife's Macbook Air M1 I do not see any differences in ease of use.
Comparing Ubuntu 20.04 with my wife's Macbook Air M1 I do not see any differences in ease of use.
Just like XP was the best time with toy's are us UI, Vista was the best time due to DX 10 being Vista only, 7 was the best time for whatever reason I cannot remember anymore,...
Now Windows 11 will again be the best reason to migrate, and nothing will change yet again.
Now Windows 11 will again be the best reason to migrate, and nothing will change yet again.
Windows 7 was Microsofts Snow Leopard IMO, i use Linux though.
We're building a cross-platform commercial application[0] in Rust (with Iced[1]), and it's deployed for Windows, MacOS, and Linux. We get blazing-fast speed and cross-platform operation without Electron or Web tech bloating the build.
Distribution to Linux has been fine so far, and hopefully we're part of the solution to the problem you've outlined.
[0]: https://cryptowat.ch/apps/desktop
[1]: https://github.com/hecrj/iced/
Distribution to Linux has been fine so far, and hopefully we're part of the solution to the problem you've outlined.
[0]: https://cryptowat.ch/apps/desktop
[1]: https://github.com/hecrj/iced/
A lot of that probably just comes down to Rust and its standardized tooling and static linking. Which, maybe that is the solution.
it is. dynamic linking is a mistake on today's desktops/laptop. disk is plentiful and most of a graphic programs space usage is in assets rather than the program.
Do you have any concrete criticism or are you just spreading FUD? How do Windows or Mac OS provide better support for commercial development?
The reason Mac OS and Windows have more users is because of pre-installs. It is almost impossible for a regular user to find a PC with Linux preinstalled on it, so application developers ignore the platform.
Lots of companies have successfully built commercial GUI products on top of linux. However most of these products are specialist tools (e.g. EDA, video editor) or embedded. I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with the development or distribution tools.
The reason Mac OS and Windows have more users is because of pre-installs. It is almost impossible for a regular user to find a PC with Linux preinstalled on it, so application developers ignore the platform.
Lots of companies have successfully built commercial GUI products on top of linux. However most of these products are specialist tools (e.g. EDA, video editor) or embedded. I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with the development or distribution tools.
> How do Windows or Mac OS provide better support for commercial development?
They commit to long-term support for software distributed as shrinkwrapped binaries? You can buy a program written for Windows 20 years ago and it will work. If you try to run a program written for Linux 5 years ago it probably won't.
They commit to long-term support for software distributed as shrinkwrapped binaries? You can buy a program written for Windows 20 years ago and it will work. If you try to run a program written for Linux 5 years ago it probably won't.
Packaging systems such as Flatpak, AppImage, and Snap allow Linux apps to have extensive backward compatibility going forward.
Maybe. I don't think the Linux world has made a credible commitment to support all or any of those going forward. In 5 years' time we can try to run 5 year old apps in those formats and see whether they work; I wouldn't bet on it myself.
Flatpak is confirmed to work on 28 Linux distros, and is pre-installed on 9 of them: https://www.flatpak.org/setup. Red Hat Enterprise Linux is committing to a 10 year support lifecycle for its Flatpak runtimes: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2020/08/12/introducing-th...
AppImage just works on any Linux distribution. There are no external dependencies, since the package bundles all of the dependencies and there is no runtime required. I don't see how an AppImage downloaded today wouldn't work in 5 years.
I don't like Snap because the server implementation is closed source and controlled by a single company (Canonical), but Ubuntu 20.04 LTS (which bundles Snap) is supported until April 2030.
AppImage just works on any Linux distribution. There are no external dependencies, since the package bundles all of the dependencies and there is no runtime required. I don't see how an AppImage downloaded today wouldn't work in 5 years.
I don't like Snap because the server implementation is closed source and controlled by a single company (Canonical), but Ubuntu 20.04 LTS (which bundles Snap) is supported until April 2030.
The fact that you're mentioning three different systems kind of proves the point - maybe one of them will still be working in 10 years on some distributions, but I wouldn't want to count on all of them working on the distributions that matter in 10 years' time. I'm old enough to remember LSB, which was notionally supported by all the big distros, but turned out to be useless in practice.
Yes. Flatpak is a game-changer.
That's true for Windows, but it isn't true for macOS - Apple released its first x86 computer in 2006 and its last operating system capable of running PPC software in 2009 - no 2005 software could run on a 2009 Mac. Apple released its first operating system able to run x86-64 apps in 2007, and the last OS capable of running x86 apps in 2017 - no 2006 software could run on a 2017 Mac (and lots of post-2006 software can't either, because developers were in no hurry to switch to 64-bit builds).
My employer makes commercial cross platform software for Windows and Linux (and in decades past, various commercial Unixes). If you install the 32-bit libraries, you can run our software from 8 years ago just fine on modern Linux. If you also use LD_PRELOAD to replace a couple of C library functions with ones that don't take the `restrict` type qualifier on their arguments too seriously, then you can run our software from 16 years ago just fine too.
Commercial software didn't come to Linux in the volume that it came to Windows and macOS because the users didn't come to Linux in the volume they came to Windows and macOS. And the users didn't come because Mac and Windows mostly just work, that was far from the case for Linux in the late 90s and early 2000s when the total number of desktop and laptops in service was exploding. And these days Linux mostly just works - I can't remember the last time I had to futz with an X11 modeline or a kernel module - but its too late.
My employer makes commercial cross platform software for Windows and Linux (and in decades past, various commercial Unixes). If you install the 32-bit libraries, you can run our software from 8 years ago just fine on modern Linux. If you also use LD_PRELOAD to replace a couple of C library functions with ones that don't take the `restrict` type qualifier on their arguments too seriously, then you can run our software from 16 years ago just fine too.
Commercial software didn't come to Linux in the volume that it came to Windows and macOS because the users didn't come to Linux in the volume they came to Windows and macOS. And the users didn't come because Mac and Windows mostly just work, that was far from the case for Linux in the late 90s and early 2000s when the total number of desktop and laptops in service was exploding. And these days Linux mostly just works - I can't remember the last time I had to futz with an X11 modeline or a kernel module - but its too late.
Rosetta was available until Lion, which wasn't released until July 2011.
You’re right; my reasoning was wrong - it’s not the last Rosetta OS but the first non-Rosetta OS where you can’t run old software anymore. But my overall point that in a Mac you can’t use software much older than a decade still stands. Decade from now a new Mac will probably only run AArch64 software.
Can’t this be solved by statically linking everything to the binary?
> commercial software
All the commercial (proprietary) software I run (and my colleagues run) is web based nowadays. The commercial (proprietary) software we build is also web based nowadays.
Sure there are exceptions. But for most office work: web based is the norm.
The fact that linux does fine in this area can be reduced from the fact that Chromebooks haven't flopped.
All the commercial (proprietary) software I run (and my colleagues run) is web based nowadays. The commercial (proprietary) software we build is also web based nowadays.
Sure there are exceptions. But for most office work: web based is the norm.
The fact that linux does fine in this area can be reduced from the fact that Chromebooks haven't flopped.
Android was (massively) successful with very very few native commercial software.
Android may have been helped along with the backing of, and too-important-to-fail attitude of, one of the richest, most influential, and most technologically adept conglomerates to ever exist.
> The Linux desktop never made it because it’s a terrible platform for distributing commercial applications.
Good. Please let Linux continue to remain exactly what it is now, an amazing operating system for people who want to avoid Microsoft and Apple.
I certainly don't want it to "make it" so commercial apps take over.
Good. Please let Linux continue to remain exactly what it is now, an amazing operating system for people who want to avoid Microsoft and Apple.
I certainly don't want it to "make it" so commercial apps take over.
Do tools like Electron not alleviate linux app development pains?
[deleted]
The brutal fact is that the web has the same APIs that iOS has at this point.
You should not be running closed apps on your OS. Ever.
You should not be running closed apps on your OS. Ever.
I will try some linux apologetics
1. What is great about the windows GUI? Virtual desktops depend on monitors, annoying popup notifications that cannot be disabled and its resource intensive. IMHO linux has always been light years ahead of windows for as long as I remember, theres dozens of window managers better than the windows one. I am never 100% comfortable in windows, it's so locked down I feel like I am living in a hotel.
2. I do everything with the google docs these days, even on windows. So do a lot of businesses.
3. Again, most people seem to be using google calendar.
4. I actually found it easier to install on laptops back in the day. UEFI made it more painful.
5. A lot of unix tools are 2nd class citizens on windows. You can use WSL but file access is dog slow compared to the real thing.
1. What is great about the windows GUI? Virtual desktops depend on monitors, annoying popup notifications that cannot be disabled and its resource intensive. IMHO linux has always been light years ahead of windows for as long as I remember, theres dozens of window managers better than the windows one. I am never 100% comfortable in windows, it's so locked down I feel like I am living in a hotel.
2. I do everything with the google docs these days, even on windows. So do a lot of businesses.
3. Again, most people seem to be using google calendar.
4. I actually found it easier to install on laptops back in the day. UEFI made it more painful.
5. A lot of unix tools are 2nd class citizens on windows. You can use WSL but file access is dog slow compared to the real thing.
>I do everything with the google docs these days, even on windows. So do a lot of businesses.
Some might, but goodness knows I've never run into one. The corporate America I have interacted with so far (30 year career, so not trivial) is Office all the way down, and deeply enmeshed with Exchange calendaring. (I mean, as an MSFT-hater from the 90s, it pains me to admit this, but Exchange calendaring is materially better than anything else. Sometimes, Redmond does things well.)
Some might, but goodness knows I've never run into one. The corporate America I have interacted with so far (30 year career, so not trivial) is Office all the way down, and deeply enmeshed with Exchange calendaring. (I mean, as an MSFT-hater from the 90s, it pains me to admit this, but Exchange calendaring is materially better than anything else. Sometimes, Redmond does things well.)
I am pretty sure that we're all just myopic and tend to project what goes on inside of our little echo chambers across the entire space (unless I'm the one projecting... nope, couldn't be!)
Heck, I regularly manage to run into people that have managed to convince themselves that nobody actually runs Linux servers or that Java is the only programming language that has any traction...
The truth is that real-world tech adoption is actually extremely heterogeneous and we would all do well to remind ourselves of that from time to time.
Heck, I regularly manage to run into people that have managed to convince themselves that nobody actually runs Linux servers or that Java is the only programming language that has any traction...
The truth is that real-world tech adoption is actually extremely heterogeneous and we would all do well to remind ourselves of that from time to time.
I’ll never understand how people can be close to effective with Google Docs.
It’s fine as a replacement for Word (I guess? I’m not much of a Word user). But Excel is so far ahead. And the ergonomics of working in a real application vs a web app is a significant difference.
It’s fine as a replacement for Word (I guess? I’m not much of a Word user). But Excel is so far ahead. And the ergonomics of working in a real application vs a web app is a significant difference.
> It’s fine as a replacement for Word (I guess? I’m not much of a Word user).
Google Docs is to Word what Google Sheets is to Excel in terms of functionality. As long as what you're doing is simple, it's fine, and if what you're doing requires collaboration, it's great. But when you want to do something remotely complex, Docs and Sheets largely get their asses handed to them by Apple's free iWork apps, let alone Microsoft Office.
Google Docs is to Word what Google Sheets is to Excel in terms of functionality. As long as what you're doing is simple, it's fine, and if what you're doing requires collaboration, it's great. But when you want to do something remotely complex, Docs and Sheets largely get their asses handed to them by Apple's free iWork apps, let alone Microsoft Office.
I mean, you're right, no one at Goldman Sachs is using Google sheets unless it's to get everyone's lunch orders together. (Hell, I bet Google's finance team uses Excel.) But most of us don't work at Goldman and don't do anything remotely complex. I would guess that 90% of Excel users fall into this category and that's who Sheets is for.
And the rest of the people should be using pandas, a database, or data visualization tools (tableau) instead.
Why?
Because being dependent on Salesforce is so much better than being dependent on any other big proprietary corporation?
I don't know any huge, non-tech companies (insurance, commercial banks, investment banks, heavy industry, auto manufs, etc.) that use the Google ecosystem (office & mail). I'm sure all of them use Microsoft Exchange (slowly moving to MSFT cloud), instead of GMail. If someone knows any good exceptions, please share!
https://workspace.google.com/learn-more/pwc_and_google_bring...
I think the big transition at PWC was 5 years or so ago I think, but to this day every document I get from them is Excel / Word. Despite how much work went into those accounts - these are not complex spreadsheets either!
I think the big transition at PWC was 5 years or so ago I think, but to this day every document I get from them is Excel / Word. Despite how much work went into those accounts - these are not complex spreadsheets either!
Did you ever think that PWC is sending Excel/Word to exchange data with outside parties? And internally the use GSuite? It seems possible.
Two things make Google Sheets infinitely more useful than Excel to me on a daily basis:
- Regex support in find & replace and regexextract(). - FX rates as a formula instead of as a data type. IIRC Excel requires 2 columns to display a FX rate (one to specify the pair, one to print the number); Google Sheets specifies the pair inside the formula.
- Regex support in find & replace and regexextract(). - FX rates as a formula instead of as a data type. IIRC Excel requires 2 columns to display a FX rate (one to specify the pair, one to print the number); Google Sheets specifies the pair inside the formula.
As someone who has recently had to switch from Google Sheets to Office365 the experience has been very poor. Even things like keyboard shortcuts are very inconsistent with the web version of Excel. And if someone is editing the document while people are editing the web version watch out, random things can happen.
Example: How do you enter a cell to edit in Excel? On the desktop (I'm a mac user), it's ctrl-u (yep - ctrl). On the web I can't find any shortcut. I have to double click the cell like an animal.
Example: How do you select all the text inside a cell. On the mac it's cmd-a as you'd expect, on the web it's ctrl-a. Sigh.
The seamless collaboration of Google's apps is a joy, though as you've indicated, you give up a lot of features and power.
Example: How do you enter a cell to edit in Excel? On the desktop (I'm a mac user), it's ctrl-u (yep - ctrl). On the web I can't find any shortcut. I have to double click the cell like an animal.
Example: How do you select all the text inside a cell. On the mac it's cmd-a as you'd expect, on the web it's ctrl-a. Sigh.
The seamless collaboration of Google's apps is a joy, though as you've indicated, you give up a lot of features and power.
Thing is, with O365, there's always the desktop app.
It's the sharing. In distributed teams that one feature makes up for a multitude of sins.
Maybe for replacing Word, not Excel. Google Sheets is handy for basic tasks among small/large groups. Get even a tiny bit "sophisticated" and it's all over.
I mostly replaced excel with libreoffice sheets where possible.
I actually prefer writer in all circumstances.
For everything else similar (e.g. shared complex excel docs with tons of VB) I use MS office on a mac mini and my main desktop is a fc33 build with an RTX3070 and AMD5900X
Thanks, good to see some options I can dabble with.
We have a 100% remote company. We run our business on Google Sheets. It's entirely sufficient for our purposes which include cloud cost modeling (we do a lot of that) as well as cash flow management and financial projections.
I'm an Excel fan as well but in our case it simply would not work due to the fact the team is spread across so many locations.
I'm an Excel fan as well but in our case it simply would not work due to the fact the team is spread across so many locations.
I will give Sheets another go soon to see how it's progressed but I've always run up against a deal breaker before. And I say "soon" because I thought I'd have a Sunday-morning nosey around right now after reading your comment (I was inspired) ... and ... :
** Google Docs encountered an error. Please try reloading this page, or coming back to it in a few minutes.
To learn more about the Google Docs editors, please visit our help centre.
We're sorry for the inconvenience. - The Google Docs Team **
... It went away 10 minutes later, but I can't have that in the middle of a working day.
** Google Docs encountered an error. Please try reloading this page, or coming back to it in a few minutes.
To learn more about the Google Docs editors, please visit our help centre.
We're sorry for the inconvenience. - The Google Docs Team **
... It went away 10 minutes later, but I can't have that in the middle of a working day.
And then ... :
Sorry, the file you have requested does not exist.
Make sure that you have the correct URL and that the file exists.
Get stuff done with Google Drive
Apps in Google Drive make it easy to create, store and share online documents, spreadsheets, presentations and more.
Learn more at drive.google.com/start/apps.
....
The above is actually an error produced by me just trying to create a new blank page.
Sorry, I won't be going near Sheets for anything I care about. I'll try again in a year. The above annoyed the hell out of me.
Sorry, the file you have requested does not exist.
Make sure that you have the correct URL and that the file exists.
Get stuff done with Google Drive
Apps in Google Drive make it easy to create, store and share online documents, spreadsheets, presentations and more.
Learn more at drive.google.com/start/apps.
....
The above is actually an error produced by me just trying to create a new blank page.
Sorry, I won't be going near Sheets for anything I care about. I'll try again in a year. The above annoyed the hell out of me.
I've never seen this bug, but it would definitely alter my opinion as well. :/
Microsoft has invested heavily in realtime collaboration, and while I think Google still has the edge there, O365's collaboration features are reasonably good in 2021.
I realize the parent question was more focused on how people find success with Google Docs, but if that success is primarily due to collaboration, and collaboration in O365 is now decent, I wonder if some of the justifications for using Google Docs still hold up.
I realize the parent question was more focused on how people find success with Google Docs, but if that success is primarily due to collaboration, and collaboration in O365 is now decent, I wonder if some of the justifications for using Google Docs still hold up.
I've had some pretty terrible experiences trying to to collaboratively edit word documents in Office 365. You get all sorts of corruption with people bumping into one another. Big groups, small groups, it doesn't matter, at some point you'll see some malarkey.
I’m with you. I’ve had some pretty terrible experiences with this in the past as well.
I haven’t had many issues over the last 6-12 months, though, and as far as I can tell, they continue to improve.
Don’t get me wrong - I’m not a fan of MS products and as I said, I think Google still has the edge in collaboration. But they’ve come far, and it wasn’t that long ago that those collaboration features were unusable or non-existent.
I haven’t had many issues over the last 6-12 months, though, and as far as I can tell, they continue to improve.
Don’t get me wrong - I’m not a fan of MS products and as I said, I think Google still has the edge in collaboration. But they’ve come far, and it wasn’t that long ago that those collaboration features were unusable or non-existent.
Same here. Office 365 collaboration is cumbersome and awful. (YMMV, this is my experience.)
Google Docs is missing some basic features that Word had in the 1990s, like the ability to define your own styles.
I'm currently in a doc where I just set all of the main styles (title, headline 1, etc) to my own styles. Or do you mean something else? Just change some words, then select headline 1 -> update from here
You are redefining the existing styles, not defining your own styles.
Aah, ok. Well apparently I've never needed to get that fancy with word.
The semi-joke with Word is that we all know everyone only uses about 20% of its features, but it turns out nobody agrees on what that 20% is. :)
Jupyter Notebooks is my Excel, so that's how.
It's a different thing, though, isn't it?
I do a big charity bike ride every year, and track my donors in Excel (largely because the initial dump of donation data came from the org in that format).
I try to be smart about my appeals, and I rapidly ran into limitations on pulling certain sets of email addresses out of Excel easily/simply/etc., and my next-step turned out to be Jupyter. It's GREAT for that, and I can still keep my data in Excel as a source and just query against it.
But I can't imagine trying to do the whole thing in Jupyter.
I do a big charity bike ride every year, and track my donors in Excel (largely because the initial dump of donation data came from the org in that format).
I try to be smart about my appeals, and I rapidly ran into limitations on pulling certain sets of email addresses out of Excel easily/simply/etc., and my next-step turned out to be Jupyter. It's GREAT for that, and I can still keep my data in Excel as a source and just query against it.
But I can't imagine trying to do the whole thing in Jupyter.
I do project organization in excel, which is possibly close to what you're thinking, but I really don't like doing formula editing in excel when I can just do it in python. It's personal preference tho.
Excel is an amazing piece of software esp for a power gui. But so is Python. For my work I'm either dealing with about 1k rows max... or I'm dealing with millions of rows or more, things that break excel. Or multi terra, stuff that likes a cluster.
Excel is an amazing piece of software esp for a power gui. But so is Python. For my work I'm either dealing with about 1k rows max... or I'm dealing with millions of rows or more, things that break excel. Or multi terra, stuff that likes a cluster.
How many of us do actually excel? As someone who never was familiar with the windows or UI world of things I usually solve my excel issues with code.
I do, and it IS powerful, but lots of the things that it's really good at in a finance context I tend to solve with SQL. But that's because I am -- or used to be -- a programmer.
If you've never programmed, "just use SQL" is super daunting. OTOH, Excel gives you access to that kind of data query power without writing code, and the people who are good at it can do pretty amazing things with it. It's a different way of solving that problem.
It's a powerful tool, and it's a well-built one (again, it pains me to say, bc I grew up hating MSFT). If you're on a platform that has access to a native app, exploring it can actually be fun.
If you've never programmed, "just use SQL" is super daunting. OTOH, Excel gives you access to that kind of data query power without writing code, and the people who are good at it can do pretty amazing things with it. It's a different way of solving that problem.
It's a powerful tool, and it's a well-built one (again, it pains me to say, bc I grew up hating MSFT). If you're on a platform that has access to a native app, exploring it can actually be fun.
My point is it's a niche product. It's something only a few people actually need and use and something that has plenty of 'more powerful' alternatives.
It's not something most people would choose their operating system for.
It's not something most people would choose their operating system for.
I'm not sure I consider interoperable spreadsheets a "niche" product at all. It's a key consideration for huge chunks of the Fortune 500, for example.
Just because the average HN poster doesn't interact with these people from their tech silo doesn't mean they don't exist.
And yeah, there's a real history in computing of spreadsheets literally driving platform adoption.
Just because the average HN poster doesn't interact with these people from their tech silo doesn't mean they don't exist.
And yeah, there's a real history in computing of spreadsheets literally driving platform adoption.
Google sheets with JavaScript seems to be far more useful doing business automation tasks in small companies.
In my world, Office is only used when you are consulting to companies where most data is for monthly meetings made of people that don't really care.
In my world, Office is only used when you are consulting to companies where most data is for monthly meetings made of people that don't really care.
95% of the small businesses I’ve interacted with don’t have someone that knows JavaScript let alone are automating with JavaScript
I'd agree, but I actually know two self taught programmers who started with Google sheets, then added a little gscript.. The same can and does happen with Excel but using python compatibility is problematic and VB isn't as quickly transferable to working with any web API, etc.
I have never worked for a company that doesn't use GSuite since a college internship at a 100+ years old insurance company.
I think that just means you’re not interacting with the 3/4 of large companies that are not in infotech…
I've been writing software professionally for a decade - I wanna know where all these people using ms office are hiding - I've certainly never seen them.
Googles suite of tools have been first class citizens at almost every company I've been at.
Googles suite of tools have been first class citizens at almost every company I've been at.
I suspect that says more about the sort of companies you've been working at. Office is far and away the dominant player in the segment.
Similarly I'd like to know where the one third of the world's population that use GSuite are.
Honestly? Most teams/organizations use G-Suite unless you are a finance/legal/legacy company or some entities in midwest states.
HILARIOUSLY wrong.
Excel is so far ahead of Google's offering - or anything else in that space -- that it's ubiquitous. It's insanely powerful, and its power is accessible to nontechnical people. That's an enormous thing.
Remember, spreadsheets were the original "killer app" that got PCs into the biz world. They're still a huge part of everyday life for vast numbers of workers -- and not just in the midwest as you sneeringly suggest.
Excel is so far ahead of Google's offering - or anything else in that space -- that it's ubiquitous. It's insanely powerful, and its power is accessible to nontechnical people. That's an enormous thing.
Remember, spreadsheets were the original "killer app" that got PCs into the biz world. They're still a huge part of everyday life for vast numbers of workers -- and not just in the midwest as you sneeringly suggest.
Why was this downvoted? With the exception of "HILARIOUSLY wrong.", I agree wholeheartedly. I also didn't like the comment about the "midwest". Is Chicago not a Global Alpha city? It has one of the biggest options and futures exchanges in the world and plenty of big banks/insurance/finance companies. And Mayo Clinic is one of largest and most sophisticated hospital systems in the world. Probably has a ginormous IT budget. But, hey, it's the midwest, right?
well other than being needlessly abrassive I would say it's downvoted (although I myself didn't vote on it) because
> it's ubiquitous
it isn't - as I stated elsewhere I've never worked at a company where MS Office tools were a first class citizen, while almost every company I've worked at uses google docs/sheets frequently.
> It's insanely powerful
maybe? I mean I think if you need powerful tools excel/sheets is never the solution - they are really good at solving simple problems easily - there are better fits for problems that need "insane power"
> its power is accessible to nontechnical people
very fair point - the on ramp gets nontechnical people to become technical, but it is _not_ easier to do complex things in excel/sheets than in a general purpose programming language. It's just more accessible.
> as you sneeringly suggest.
starting and ending with a point to make the parent sounds malicious when no malice needed to be interpreted.
I think I will go back and downvote now. It's simply not a conversation that warrants much of any emotional response. We're talking about boring tools here.
> it's ubiquitous
it isn't - as I stated elsewhere I've never worked at a company where MS Office tools were a first class citizen, while almost every company I've worked at uses google docs/sheets frequently.
> It's insanely powerful
maybe? I mean I think if you need powerful tools excel/sheets is never the solution - they are really good at solving simple problems easily - there are better fits for problems that need "insane power"
> its power is accessible to nontechnical people
very fair point - the on ramp gets nontechnical people to become technical, but it is _not_ easier to do complex things in excel/sheets than in a general purpose programming language. It's just more accessible.
> as you sneeringly suggest.
starting and ending with a point to make the parent sounds malicious when no malice needed to be interpreted.
I think I will go back and downvote now. It's simply not a conversation that warrants much of any emotional response. We're talking about boring tools here.
1. I don't think you understand what "ubiquitous" means. Was Excel present at all? Yes? Well, there you go.
2. There's no "maybe" about Excel's accessible power. You have a bias to coding, which is predictable here, but "just learn to code" is not the answer for most people who just want to ask questions of the dataset. Excel does this for them. So yes, if you need powerful tools, spreadsheets absolutely ARE VERY OFTEN THE SOLUTION.
3. The power available to someone who learned to code at 12 is one thing, but that power is fundamentally alien and totally unapproachable to the average MBA in finance. And consequently it's entirely irrelevant. OTOH, Excel with its host of data science add-ins is HIGHLY available and will allow the user to get answers without having to learn to code. This is power.
My comment re: "as you sneeringly suggest" was 100% directed at pknomad, who snarked that the only people using something as tragically unhip as spreadsheets were in the midwest -- i.e., out of step with the mainstream and tied to ways of the past.
I stand by that comment without reservation, but it wasn't directed at YOU given that it was a reply to someone else.
2. There's no "maybe" about Excel's accessible power. You have a bias to coding, which is predictable here, but "just learn to code" is not the answer for most people who just want to ask questions of the dataset. Excel does this for them. So yes, if you need powerful tools, spreadsheets absolutely ARE VERY OFTEN THE SOLUTION.
3. The power available to someone who learned to code at 12 is one thing, but that power is fundamentally alien and totally unapproachable to the average MBA in finance. And consequently it's entirely irrelevant. OTOH, Excel with its host of data science add-ins is HIGHLY available and will allow the user to get answers without having to learn to code. This is power.
My comment re: "as you sneeringly suggest" was 100% directed at pknomad, who snarked that the only people using something as tragically unhip as spreadsheets were in the midwest -- i.e., out of step with the mainstream and tied to ways of the past.
I stand by that comment without reservation, but it wasn't directed at YOU given that it was a reply to someone else.
+9000 for this comment. So many times I have seen very technical people dump on Excel. It is the most powerful "mid-power" platform I can think of. Just the idea that you can "record macros", then review/edit is an incredible learning platform. I've posted so many times about the power of Excel. And don't me started about custom plug-ins. You can go crazy with it.
Could you clarify? In my experience most non-costal entities outside of education space do tend to use Office as opposed to Gsuite. I'm not passing any judgement about midwest vs coastal cities.
Could you clarify how you're getting snark from me? Just FYI - I didn't downvote you.
My observation is based on the fact that most companies in mid-west (even Chicago yes) use Office generally because they're migrating from on-premise Microsoft solutions. I'm not passing any judgements.
Cargill, Old Republic Insurance company, et al all use Office365 or Microsoft solution.
Excel is indeed ahead of G suite offering but my post never made any indication otherwise.
My observation is based on the fact that most companies in mid-west (even Chicago yes) use Office generally because they're migrating from on-premise Microsoft solutions. I'm not passing any judgements.
Cargill, Old Republic Insurance company, et al all use Office365 or Microsoft solution.
Excel is indeed ahead of G suite offering but my post never made any indication otherwise.
That may be true for more casual users of office suites, but any organization that uses spreadsheets as a computational tool that does analysis on which the business depends uses Excel instead of Google Sheets. Certainly this is the case in finance and banking. (I am not necessarily an advocate of Excel as a computational tool, but it is used that way.)
Sure, if you're a software company GSuite is good enough.
Sure, if you're a software company GSuite is good enough.
In our corp we all use MS suite. Once we've decided to track vacation in the team locally. So we've made a Google spreadsheet with like 12 rows and 365 columns for a year. It was running insanely slow, editing and scrolling it was painful. Also it lacks basic things which Excel supports since forever, I don't remember now but a lot of basic styling and formatting for cells is missing. And that's just for basic work. Import a millon line .csv file to apply a formula to it and then export - wouldn't even try in g-suite. (PS: that's way faster than creating and debugging a script to do the same thing on .csv directly).
A few years ago, at my previous job, we did a two week trial of g-suite and o365.
Our o365 was down for about half the trial period. We chose google....
Our o365 was down for about half the trial period. We chose google....
Or do anything with the real world like manufacturing. Or interact with other businesses a lot like recruiting does.
And by "legacy" I presume you mean, "Have been around at least 30 years." Sorry to tell you, but the Walmarts of the world aren't so much legacy as established.
And by "legacy" I presume you mean, "Have been around at least 30 years." Sorry to tell you, but the Walmarts of the world aren't so much legacy as established.
I’m a consultant for large companies, exactly one of the last 5 projects i’ve been on used gsuite. Throughout my career I’ve seen gsuite used at 3 of some 30 companies. Where do you get this idea that everybody wants and loves to use Google software?
There are over 2 billion G Suite users.
https://www.businessinsider.com/google-g-suite-gmail-2-billi...
https://www.businessinsider.com/google-g-suite-gmail-2-billi...
I’d be surprised if there’s even 200 million GSuite (not free gmail account, since that’s not for commercial use) accounts active. They have like no market share in enterprise outside of schools. (I’ve never met anyone who wasn’t at a school that used GSuite. Which shows the circles I’m in, of course, but I think there’s a weird HN bias where people think that companies outside of smaller shops are using GSuite. Exchange is still good and cheaper than ever.)
The last three companies I've worked at have all been GSuite shops.
The company I work for, 3k people, is heavy gsuite. The company that owns them, 1.5M people, is all office or aws docs or salesforce docs, but no gsuite. So 1.497M people using office.
This is a great reply. Solid facts.
Regarding you experience with GSuite, assuming that you have used MS Office previously, do you find it sufficient for your needs?
Regarding you experience with GSuite, assuming that you have used MS Office previously, do you find it sufficient for your needs?
We use Google docs for design docs and proposals. We use sheets for basic organization. Engineering, I think, generally just jumps to SQL (redshift/mode) or Jupyter Notebook once we get beyond a few thousand rows. I use Excel sometimes to view CSVs but that's about it.
I worked with MS Office before. My use of Word was the same and google docs, actually, I think is better due to a lack of fancy features. I just use basic text formatting in outline format and attached pictures.
I didn't use excel before.
So yeah I prefer gsuite to office. I had to do a document with word and track changes over email a few months back. It was brutal. Gsuite destroys that workflow.
I worked with MS Office before. My use of Word was the same and google docs, actually, I think is better due to a lack of fancy features. I just use basic text formatting in outline format and attached pictures.
I didn't use excel before.
So yeah I prefer gsuite to office. I had to do a document with word and track changes over email a few months back. It was brutal. Gsuite destroys that workflow.
More great feedback. I'm glad you specifically answered about "sufficient for your needs". There so much bashing from power users, but (to me) the killer app of GSuite is "good enough for most users" and way cheaper than original Microsoft Office.
Note the "smallest shops" bit above.
Did those 3 companies have more than 1000 employees? 100?
Did those 3 companies have more than 1000 employees? 100?
How big were the companies? And how long had they been around?
Curious what exactly they're counting since they do say "users"? If I have a domain in G Suite with 500 users, is that 500 G Suite users or just 1 G Suite user?
Yes microsoft still has a near monopoly on the office after 30 years. I am not sure why the competition bureau only focused on internet explorer and not ms office bundling.
Having a monopoly isn’t illegal. You have to show that Microsoft is leveraging their market dominance to prevent competition.
> IMHO linux has always been light years ahead of windows for as long as I remember, theres dozens of window managers better than the windows one.
I confirm, my pathway to linux started with using alternative shells & apps on windows to improve on the existing ones, bblean, xoblite, aston shell... good times
I confirm, my pathway to linux started with using alternative shells & apps on windows to improve on the existing ones, bblean, xoblite, aston shell... good times
bblean, thanks for the flashback, these were unholy times!
> Virtual desktops depend on monitors
Why is this a negative? This is actually one of the largest pain points for me in switching from Windows/Mac to Linux.
Why is this a negative? This is actually one of the largest pain points for me in switching from Windows/Mac to Linux.
> You can use WSL but file access is dog slow
You can also use WSL2, which has fast file I/O. Unless you're trying to write to files in /mnt/c, at which point the comparison makes less sense, and a more accurate comparison would be trying to write to files on a remote Windows machine from Linux (also slow).
> compared to the real thing
Um, it is the "real thing". It's running in a hypervisor, on the real CPU core.
You can also use WSL2, which has fast file I/O. Unless you're trying to write to files in /mnt/c, at which point the comparison makes less sense, and a more accurate comparison would be trying to write to files on a remote Windows machine from Linux (also slow).
> compared to the real thing
Um, it is the "real thing". It's running in a hypervisor, on the real CPU core.
WSL2 is just a VM. It's nothing new. WSL was actually an interesting concept but it couldn't be implemented right sadly.
How is running in a VM, on modern hardware with virtualization supported natively by the CPU, not the "real thing"?
There's no transparent support for anything GUI or GPU related. There's no ability to use another hypervisor without rebooting the machine and changing a flag and then changing it back. There's no seamless access to the same filesystem. There's no seamless networking. There's no interprogram communication across the OSes without the (kinda broken) network.
Only the first one is something you get running Linux on bare hardware. The rest are goalpost-moving (and I don't even know what we'd be discussing to make those valid points honestly). And about GUI/GPU, that's actually not a valid point either, as WSL2 has OpenGL support now.
[deleted]
UEFI really is an issue.
What is the problem with UEFI? I have only installed Linux on a few computers with UEFI so far, so I don't have a great sample, but I haven't seen any problems. (I have heard about secure boot that cannot be turned off - how often is this the case?)
It's annoying. But for the end user the install is just a button and a minute more. At least on Linux.
I've yet to own a UEFI motherboard without a few glitches. I never had these problems with the BIOS...
I had. For example, HP EliteBook 8470p claims the drive is not bootable if there is a DOS partition table where no partition is marked bootable (I think it shouldn't parse the partition table at all, just check the magic and execute the first sector).
What glitches have you seen (so I'm prepared when I meet them)?
What glitches have you seen (so I'm prepared when I meet them)?
[deleted]
Not sure what you guys are doing all day. But I barely need a calendar and even more rare need any office software. When I document or plan I document in markdown in my favourite editor.
Here's my own slightly out of touch that simultaneously holds true for me and doesn't for a very large part of the populace:
1) XFCE is the pinnacle of desktop environments: https://xfce.org/
It's extremely stable, looks good, works fast and is customizable. It works equally well on old underpowered devices, modern ones, as well as servers (should you ever need that sort of thing for whatever reason). It also has plenty of widgets without any of the modern bloat.
2) LibreOffice is great open source office software: https://www.libreoffice.org/
It started out as a fork of OpenOffice and has since become the mainstay under GNU/Linux distributions. It does word processing. It does spreadsheets. You can make drawings and visualizations in it. It does presentations. There's even a simple database offering in there, a la MS Access.
It also supports MS Office formats for the most part and can convert them to open ones with very few issues! The performance is also better than any web based offering. Plus, it's cross platform!
3) Thunderbird is perhaps the best mail client, regardless of platform: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/
It's stable, reliable and has its origins in Mozilla. It does everything i'd expect a mail client to do and i've had no problems with it to date. Plus, it's cross platform!
As for mail servers, i think that mail servers are a horrible mess for the most part, regardless of which platform you need them on. I think that your best bet in that regard is just using a Docker container that packages all of the components that you'd need: https://github.com/docker-mailserver/docker-mailserver
4) This is absolutely true, but then again, you can say the same about any piece of unpopular hardware.
Linux on mobile phones is a mess. Then again, even FreeBSD on certain pieces of desktop hardware oftentimes fails to work as well. Many years have passed, but this can still be problematic, given that perhaps we treat drivers wrong as an industry.
My cheap Chinese netbook (i'm not too well off financially) had the mouse not work on Fedora and some other distros. Sometimes the audio wouldn't work. Now, sometimes the mouse gets stuck in a state where it acts as a scroll wheel. In Windows, function keys worked as they should (after pressing the Fn key you could access them), but in Linux distros it was flipped and i found myself having to press Fn to use the F1-F12 keys, with no option in BIOS to flip this. The fingerprint scanner just doesn't work and isn't even detected. The Wi-Fi drivers didn't work and i had to compile them from some random GitHub repository that i found online. The distro didn't have GCC and the netbook doesn't have an ethernet port so i had to suffer through doing an air gapped install, which was problematic because of the dependencies. I got it working for the most part, but it was a pain.
Things really should be better. But that can probably only be achieved by either open drivers and open standards for most of the hardware out there, or by killing off about 75% of the hardware vendors out there, which in practice simply means that you only have to buy hardware that works well (e.g. Thinkpads).
5) The choices that i find myself making are rather easy - either i use open source software, or i do less.
However i agree for the most part with the observations about Linux not being an awfully popular platform for porting applications. I do think that this has three main causes: packaging being somewhat difficult to get started with (as well as needing to support a variety of distros), the GUI frameworks across Windows/Linux/Mac being a total mess and there being no "good" options out there, and then there also really not being a large commercial effort to make the struggle of porting something over worthwhile.
Interestingly, the GUI framework situation isn't such a large issue if you go with something like Lazarus, JavaFX or even Swing for your software, but those can be ugly, so people don't. Still, i'd argue that either of those have the potential to be better choices than Electron apps.
1) XFCE is the pinnacle of desktop environments: https://xfce.org/
It's extremely stable, looks good, works fast and is customizable. It works equally well on old underpowered devices, modern ones, as well as servers (should you ever need that sort of thing for whatever reason). It also has plenty of widgets without any of the modern bloat.
2) LibreOffice is great open source office software: https://www.libreoffice.org/
It started out as a fork of OpenOffice and has since become the mainstay under GNU/Linux distributions. It does word processing. It does spreadsheets. You can make drawings and visualizations in it. It does presentations. There's even a simple database offering in there, a la MS Access.
It also supports MS Office formats for the most part and can convert them to open ones with very few issues! The performance is also better than any web based offering. Plus, it's cross platform!
3) Thunderbird is perhaps the best mail client, regardless of platform: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/
It's stable, reliable and has its origins in Mozilla. It does everything i'd expect a mail client to do and i've had no problems with it to date. Plus, it's cross platform!
As for mail servers, i think that mail servers are a horrible mess for the most part, regardless of which platform you need them on. I think that your best bet in that regard is just using a Docker container that packages all of the components that you'd need: https://github.com/docker-mailserver/docker-mailserver
4) This is absolutely true, but then again, you can say the same about any piece of unpopular hardware.
Linux on mobile phones is a mess. Then again, even FreeBSD on certain pieces of desktop hardware oftentimes fails to work as well. Many years have passed, but this can still be problematic, given that perhaps we treat drivers wrong as an industry.
My cheap Chinese netbook (i'm not too well off financially) had the mouse not work on Fedora and some other distros. Sometimes the audio wouldn't work. Now, sometimes the mouse gets stuck in a state where it acts as a scroll wheel. In Windows, function keys worked as they should (after pressing the Fn key you could access them), but in Linux distros it was flipped and i found myself having to press Fn to use the F1-F12 keys, with no option in BIOS to flip this. The fingerprint scanner just doesn't work and isn't even detected. The Wi-Fi drivers didn't work and i had to compile them from some random GitHub repository that i found online. The distro didn't have GCC and the netbook doesn't have an ethernet port so i had to suffer through doing an air gapped install, which was problematic because of the dependencies. I got it working for the most part, but it was a pain.
Things really should be better. But that can probably only be achieved by either open drivers and open standards for most of the hardware out there, or by killing off about 75% of the hardware vendors out there, which in practice simply means that you only have to buy hardware that works well (e.g. Thinkpads).
5) The choices that i find myself making are rather easy - either i use open source software, or i do less.
However i agree for the most part with the observations about Linux not being an awfully popular platform for porting applications. I do think that this has three main causes: packaging being somewhat difficult to get started with (as well as needing to support a variety of distros), the GUI frameworks across Windows/Linux/Mac being a total mess and there being no "good" options out there, and then there also really not being a large commercial effort to make the struggle of porting something over worthwhile.
Interestingly, the GUI framework situation isn't such a large issue if you go with something like Lazarus, JavaFX or even Swing for your software, but those can be ugly, so people don't. Still, i'd argue that either of those have the potential to be better choices than Electron apps.
Use WSL2 for non-dog-slow filesystem.
This is true if you put your code in the Hyper-V managed WSL2 VM but now you have the reverse problem of WSL1, i.e. access via Windows P9 is slow and things like symlinks do not resolve whatsoever (on the Windows side).
In WSL1, access to files on the Windows host is far quicker than WSL2 and symlinks work everywhere.
To try to counteract this, I opted in to the insiders dev channel recently to try the upcoming X11 support, i.e. run IDEA inside WSL. While the performance is quite good, it's broken, e.g. try using find in project, the window disappears immediately 9 times out of 10.
In many ways, I found WSL1 more useable as I could use one shell for both the Windows and WSL filesystems with reasonable performance. I now use cygwin if I want to use gnu linux type tools on Windows.
Once the X11 support matures it will be a pretty good experience overall if people are willing to install things like IDEA in WSL, I'm looking forward to that.
In WSL1, access to files on the Windows host is far quicker than WSL2 and symlinks work everywhere.
To try to counteract this, I opted in to the insiders dev channel recently to try the upcoming X11 support, i.e. run IDEA inside WSL. While the performance is quite good, it's broken, e.g. try using find in project, the window disappears immediately 9 times out of 10.
In many ways, I found WSL1 more useable as I could use one shell for both the Windows and WSL filesystems with reasonable performance. I now use cygwin if I want to use gnu linux type tools on Windows.
Once the X11 support matures it will be a pretty good experience overall if people are willing to install things like IDEA in WSL, I'm looking forward to that.
>In WSL1, access to files on the Windows host is far quicker than WSL2 and symlinks work everywhere.
I find this pretty annoying, as I need to access Windows files from WSL more often than the opposite (e.g. get stuff from my Windows Downloads folder, or use bash to quickly interact with a Windows folder). Do you know if access to Docker volumes is faster or slower on WSL2 by the way? I wouldn't switch back to WSL1 since some nix/cabal stuff didn't work on WSL1 at all but I am curious as that's the other point where my windows/wsl filesystems touch in ways I've never looked into.
I find this pretty annoying, as I need to access Windows files from WSL more often than the opposite (e.g. get stuff from my Windows Downloads folder, or use bash to quickly interact with a Windows folder). Do you know if access to Docker volumes is faster or slower on WSL2 by the way? I wouldn't switch back to WSL1 since some nix/cabal stuff didn't work on WSL1 at all but I am curious as that's the other point where my windows/wsl filesystems touch in ways I've never looked into.
> Do you know if access to Docker volumes is faster or slower on WSL2
If your files are stored within the VM itself, WSL2's access to them is effectively native. However accessing the files from Windows requires going through the \\wsl$ (P9) network share. This presents problems as Windows isn't going to receive file notification events if you do something like `git checkout`. Additionally, if your project utilizes symlinks, Windows only sees them as an empty file.
Users of VS Code largely will not encounter these problems as running `code` from within the WSL layer will start a remote server, it's seamless, that's genuinely very cool. However, if you use anything else, I've found it to be problematic.
The "best" solution I arrived at (other than dual-booting Linux, which is totally worth it!) is to install `xorg-server` from cygwin, install my IDE of choice in WSL2 (IDEA) and use X11 forwarding. This way the IDE has a relatively real-time view of the filesystem, receives notification events, symlinks work, chmod is preserved if using safe-writes etc.
If you need to use bash (and other tools not provided by Git Bash), cygwin is a useful addition. You can also use `mklink` from cmd/powershell to create a directory hardlink to the \\wsl$ folder if you need to copy things into WSL (although it's easier to access /mnt/drive from WSL2). Either way, I've found any direction of crossing Host/VM filesystem boundaries to be slower than WSL1's approach.
If your files are stored within the VM itself, WSL2's access to them is effectively native. However accessing the files from Windows requires going through the \\wsl$ (P9) network share. This presents problems as Windows isn't going to receive file notification events if you do something like `git checkout`. Additionally, if your project utilizes symlinks, Windows only sees them as an empty file.
Users of VS Code largely will not encounter these problems as running `code` from within the WSL layer will start a remote server, it's seamless, that's genuinely very cool. However, if you use anything else, I've found it to be problematic.
The "best" solution I arrived at (other than dual-booting Linux, which is totally worth it!) is to install `xorg-server` from cygwin, install my IDE of choice in WSL2 (IDEA) and use X11 forwarding. This way the IDE has a relatively real-time view of the filesystem, receives notification events, symlinks work, chmod is preserved if using safe-writes etc.
If you need to use bash (and other tools not provided by Git Bash), cygwin is a useful addition. You can also use `mklink` from cmd/powershell to create a directory hardlink to the \\wsl$ folder if you need to copy things into WSL (although it's easier to access /mnt/drive from WSL2). Either way, I've found any direction of crossing Host/VM filesystem boundaries to be slower than WSL1's approach.
"wsl is real Linux"
Why don't ya'll just use Linux?
This just sounds so much more difficult than using the real thing.
Why don't ya'll just use Linux?
This just sounds so much more difficult than using the real thing.
It is more difficult, and no, WSL2/WSL is not linux. You see how much it is not linux when you try to do things like install a job scheduler, or a development environment (hint, try to use vscode gui in WSL2, watch the message you get).
Real desktop linux has been, and is, a thing. I've been using Linux as my primary business desktop for more than 20 years. Yes, really.
Now, in the industry I'm in, I am forced into a windows 10 environment. Which I do the best I can to push out of the way, so I can have a real machine. MobaXterm to provide a single root X window. XFCE4 for windowing, Plank for a dock. WSL2 (unfortunately) underneath, running an older RHEL (not my choice). Looks/feels mostly like a linux box.
I use it for dev/testing/analytics/data science. File access is still as slow as sin, network performance is terrible. Windows apps are unstable, and will take down the machine from time to time.
I am pushing for a linux laptop/desktop as I am far more productive in that desktop environment. Since most of our work is linux based, this makes sense.
Real desktop linux has been, and is, a thing. I've been using Linux as my primary business desktop for more than 20 years. Yes, really.
Now, in the industry I'm in, I am forced into a windows 10 environment. Which I do the best I can to push out of the way, so I can have a real machine. MobaXterm to provide a single root X window. XFCE4 for windowing, Plank for a dock. WSL2 (unfortunately) underneath, running an older RHEL (not my choice). Looks/feels mostly like a linux box.
I use it for dev/testing/analytics/data science. File access is still as slow as sin, network performance is terrible. Windows apps are unstable, and will take down the machine from time to time.
I am pushing for a linux laptop/desktop as I am far more productive in that desktop environment. Since most of our work is linux based, this makes sense.
I mostly don't do the extra stuff they do (as they mention Code works seamlessly and thankfully that's good enough for me and obviously emacs/vim do, too), the rest is just slower cross-OS file access and I need to tinker with it only roughly as much as with my Linux installs while getting the benefits of a native Windows install on top.
If you need anything Windows-related (e.g. to use a specific game or software) using WSL on top is actually really nice (I do all my real work from there fine when not on my Linux machine currently) and less hassle than dual-booting. If I decide not to use anything Windows related or do GPU-based ML (which I assume is worse on WSl) outside of the cloud I'll install Linux on another drive on this machine and go back to it fully. I honestly never expected to stick to Windows with just WSL on this machine when I put it on for trying some games.
If you need anything Windows-related (e.g. to use a specific game or software) using WSL on top is actually really nice (I do all my real work from there fine when not on my Linux machine currently) and less hassle than dual-booting. If I decide not to use anything Windows related or do GPU-based ML (which I assume is worse on WSl) outside of the cloud I'll install Linux on another drive on this machine and go back to it fully. I honestly never expected to stick to Windows with just WSL on this machine when I put it on for trying some games.
UEFI has really made it difficult to dual boot, especially off the same drive. Windows 10 overwriting your GRUB install every major update is just pure hell. Then if you opt for separate physical disks, you must forego fastboot features so you can use your UEFI Boot Menu to select between separate Win10 and Linux physical disks.
That’s why I put up with WSL2. I hate dealing with bootloaders.
That’s why I put up with WSL2. I hate dealing with bootloaders.
Even if you are fine with fixing bootloaders it's also just a bit much to have to do a full restart to switch between software, and to not be able to use some things side by side.
You can use software that doesn't work on Linux (without WINE/hacks anyway) but still use the power of GNU/Linux for development style tasks when necessary.
It's easier now to just maintain a single installation of Windows than setup a dual boot and continuously switch between whenever you want to edit an image in Photoshop or play a commercial game.
It's easier now to just maintain a single installation of Windows than setup a dual boot and continuously switch between whenever you want to edit an image in Photoshop or play a commercial game.
You can do LSW. That is, just use a Windows VM for those software. You make the same tradeoffs except less often.
I'd be sacrificing a lot more resources to run a full Windows VM than just using Windows natively.
And nevermind doing GPU accelerated tasks unless I want to faff around doing KVM stuff.
Easier to just use Windows directly and WSL2 when I need it.
And nevermind doing GPU accelerated tasks unless I want to faff around doing KVM stuff.
Easier to just use Windows directly and WSL2 when I need it.
You're sacrifing the exact same amount when using WSL2. The difference is that Windows is only useful for Photoshop and 3% of video games, while as a developer you're using Linux all day.
You're not sacrificing any resources, in both cases you're running a full Linux and a full Windows.
As far as GPU acceleration it's just as much of a pain inside of WSL2 than in a regular VM.
Fwiw I only use Windows for Genshin Impact now. Photoshop works well enough usig Wine, the installer won't run but that's not an issue.
You're not sacrificing any resources, in both cases you're running a full Linux and a full Windows.
As far as GPU acceleration it's just as much of a pain inside of WSL2 than in a regular VM.
Fwiw I only use Windows for Genshin Impact now. Photoshop works well enough usig Wine, the installer won't run but that's not an issue.
>You're sacrifing the exact same amount when using WSL2.
Not really. For one, you are mostly fine running Linux terminal-only so it's really light and you are using less resources with Windows+WSL than Linux + full VM Windows.
Second, if you need both Linux and Windows you typically need Windows for something heavy - e.g. a Game, Photoshop, whatever, so having Windows in the VM is typically more limiting.
Not really. For one, you are mostly fine running Linux terminal-only so it's really light and you are using less resources with Windows+WSL than Linux + full VM Windows.
Second, if you need both Linux and Windows you typically need Windows for something heavy - e.g. a Game, Photoshop, whatever, so having Windows in the VM is typically more limiting.
> As far as GPU acceleration it's just as much of a pain inside of WSL2 than in a regular VM.
What do you need it for in WSL2? Perhaps machine learning/crypto stuff?
> Photoshop works well enough usig Wine, the installer won't run but that's not an issue
If you were using Windows it would work better than 'well enough' and the installer would run.
What do you need it for in WSL2? Perhaps machine learning/crypto stuff?
> Photoshop works well enough usig Wine, the installer won't run but that's not an issue
If you were using Windows it would work better than 'well enough' and the installer would run.
Can you now use WSL2 together with other hypervisors like VirtualBox or VMWare? A while back WSL2 required use of HyperV and that removes possibility to run other VM software.
Big no go for anyone who also want to test software in other VMs
Big no go for anyone who also want to test software in other VMs
I've got a hazy memory of trying this but had to back out because something broke. There was some big limitation of WSL2 I cant remember.
I'd bet it was network access. It's a bizarre and common problem (I see more people commenting on the issues all the time) which you can kind of fix by forcing 8.8.8.8 or a different nameserver into /etc/resolv.conf but it's unclear to me why this doesn't work out of the box.
yes that was 100% it! I use WSL to do web dev in a windows machine so I can use all my favourite tools. So no WSL2 for me (though that work around is worth a shot).
Actually it’s only faster for native fs access IIRC. So if you need to access cross-fs WSL Legacy may be more performant.
I can’t agree with this in 2021, but not for the reasons one might think. I agree that native app development never became a cohesive or predictable thing. But then most apps that people use these days aren’t native.
Business apps: Google Docs & Microsoft Office both have web versions that are good enough for many people.
Mail / calendar clients: I am a nerd who prefers to use emacs for email, but I’m the weirdo—just like anyone who uses a native Outlook client. I also use Fastmail’s web interface, its iOS app, and the mail app on my iPhone. And even that is weird, because everyone just uses Gmail.
Laptop support: Yes that used to be a problem for Linux for varying definitions of “recently.” Used to be. My corp-issued laptop took to Linux just fine with nothing discernibly less functional than Windows.
The apps that don’t exist on the web are getting more and more niche.
Business apps: Google Docs & Microsoft Office both have web versions that are good enough for many people.
Mail / calendar clients: I am a nerd who prefers to use emacs for email, but I’m the weirdo—just like anyone who uses a native Outlook client. I also use Fastmail’s web interface, its iOS app, and the mail app on my iPhone. And even that is weird, because everyone just uses Gmail.
Laptop support: Yes that used to be a problem for Linux for varying definitions of “recently.” Used to be. My corp-issued laptop took to Linux just fine with nothing discernibly less functional than Windows.
The apps that don’t exist on the web are getting more and more niche.
I do not interact with any professional contacts who use Gmail. It's universally Exchange in my professional life.
This MIGHT be because the invite/accept/scheduling setup in Exchange is so good that it's hard to sell anything else. It also might be that most big orgs are very wisely reticent to host their email with an advertising company.
I'm also gonna push back on the "web tools are enough for most people." I mean, how effective is the web version of Excel, really? Can it easily interact with local data stores for elaborate data mining and updatable queries? My guess is "probably not". How is it for macro development? My company works closely with the finance orgs of our client parties, and let me tell you a LOT of these folks are extremely advanced Excel users. Web tools aren't to par here.
Web Outlook is also pretty awful compared to the native version, quite honestly, as is Word. Maybe PowerPoint is okay, but I'm not a power user of PPT so I don't really know.
This MIGHT be because the invite/accept/scheduling setup in Exchange is so good that it's hard to sell anything else. It also might be that most big orgs are very wisely reticent to host their email with an advertising company.
I'm also gonna push back on the "web tools are enough for most people." I mean, how effective is the web version of Excel, really? Can it easily interact with local data stores for elaborate data mining and updatable queries? My guess is "probably not". How is it for macro development? My company works closely with the finance orgs of our client parties, and let me tell you a LOT of these folks are extremely advanced Excel users. Web tools aren't to par here.
Web Outlook is also pretty awful compared to the native version, quite honestly, as is Word. Maybe PowerPoint is okay, but I'm not a power user of PPT so I don't really know.
Huh, interesting. Since GSuite became a thing I've never seen Exchange in my professional life, so, generously, since 2007/8? I've only had one employer that used Exchange and they sold a setup for it, but even they were switching internally to use GSuite by the time I left, if I recall correctly. I recall the switch as being extremely abrupt in that era.
While this isn't a hard and fast rule, GSuite adoption outside of the "tech sector" is extremely low. We have to recognize our own biases and that the experiences of the average HN reader doesn't reflect the larger business world.
Very much this.
My professional life has been interacting with very large organizations (as clients, not employers) -- think Fortune 500 firms, if not bigger. Major oil companies (I live in Texas), major defense contractors, etc.
These are not GSuite users, generally speaking. It's Office and Exchange in these places. Microsoft is VERY VERY STRONG at the Enterprise level.
My professional life has been interacting with very large organizations (as clients, not employers) -- think Fortune 500 firms, if not bigger. Major oil companies (I live in Texas), major defense contractors, etc.
These are not GSuite users, generally speaking. It's Office and Exchange in these places. Microsoft is VERY VERY STRONG at the Enterprise level.
I’ve used outlook/exchange for nearly 20 years at work, with over a decade of that on the web version, which has got progreso ly more featureful as we upgrade (slowly) to more recent versions. Most recently moved to cloud based exchange and it’s still fine - and none of the sync issues that I hear from people who use macs.
I'm in the UK, have also worked a lot with large enterprise customers in Europe and my experience matches yours.
Chromebooks and gmail have eaten the education sector, so if indeed you’re right that GSuite adoption outside the tech sector and education sectors, then this will be short lived.
> Can it easily interact with local data stores for elaborate data mining and updatable queries?
Pushback -- neither excel nor sheets are the right tool for that job.
Pushback -- neither excel nor sheets are the right tool for that job.
They're not IDEAL and they're not what you or I might choose in a vacuum, but for the people I'm talking about, they absolutely ARE.
- No other tools are made available to them by their hidebound, ossified IT;
- They don't have training in SQL or other query languages, but they are WIZARDS with pivot tables and related technologies.
One thing that's hard for tech folks to really internalize is that tool choice is secondary to results for many folks. That's okay. It's especially ok if organizational factors prevent better or more "appropriate" tools.
- No other tools are made available to them by their hidebound, ossified IT;
- They don't have training in SQL or other query languages, but they are WIZARDS with pivot tables and related technologies.
One thing that's hard for tech folks to really internalize is that tool choice is secondary to results for many folks. That's okay. It's especially ok if organizational factors prevent better or more "appropriate" tools.
It’s a shrinking niche that uses Excel for data things. I’d argue google docs is fine for people who want to make a shopping list at the low end. And the low barriers to using R or Python with Pandas have been siphoning off the high-end of Excel users for years now.
The people you describe still exist, just like me and my fellow emacs users. But we’re not the future.
The people you describe still exist, just like me and my fellow emacs users. But we’re not the future.
Let me ask gently what you do professionally, because in our market -- high-end project management financial reporting software sold to very large customers -- Excel is absolutely EVERYWHERE, even with younger clients.
R and Pandas are cool, but they do not appear to be gaining market share from people using pivot tables and Power Query in our market.
R and Pandas are cool, but they do not appear to be gaining market share from people using pivot tables and Power Query in our market.
My career experience is along the data science / civic technology / transportation engineering & planning / open data.
I’d posit that customers of “high-end project management financial reporting software sold to very large customers” is starting to get niche.
Again, my point isn’t to say that these people don’t exist. My point is that “data wizard” increasingly means not Excel. Plenty of non-tech firms are happy to hire entry-level “data scientists” who write some SQL queries, gin up some reports with spiffy graphics, and bang together a dashboard in Shiny or Tableau. It used to be that this kind of basic reporting work was done almost exclusively with Excel. Even if Excel has exclusivity in some specific industries, Excel’s influence and utter dominance just isn’t what it used to be.
Put another way, I’ve taught intro R / Python skills to enough undergrad and grad students in professional career tracks to see that the future for Excel looks weaker than its past.
I’d posit that customers of “high-end project management financial reporting software sold to very large customers” is starting to get niche.
Again, my point isn’t to say that these people don’t exist. My point is that “data wizard” increasingly means not Excel. Plenty of non-tech firms are happy to hire entry-level “data scientists” who write some SQL queries, gin up some reports with spiffy graphics, and bang together a dashboard in Shiny or Tableau. It used to be that this kind of basic reporting work was done almost exclusively with Excel. Even if Excel has exclusivity in some specific industries, Excel’s influence and utter dominance just isn’t what it used to be.
Put another way, I’ve taught intro R / Python skills to enough undergrad and grad students in professional career tracks to see that the future for Excel looks weaker than its past.
Very true, and yet, enormous swaths of the corporate world do exactly this all day every day.
My experience is different: most companies I have worked for use GSuite. Also, re: web Microsoft 365 Word and Excel: I used to run Linux on the Desktop much more often than I do now, and the web versions of Word and Excel helped a lot stay in Linux.
If one user in an org does something stupid will Microsoft ban the entire org with no recourse? I doubt it.
I setup several companies on google apps. Never had an issue. But I would be more reluctant to do so again.
I setup several companies on google apps. Never had an issue. But I would be more reluctant to do so again.
Given that MSFT still sells Exchange that you can host internally, they wouldn't even be ABLE to shut down the org.
I've been using Linux desktop exclusively for about 5 years and I agree with everything you said.
> Open source yadda yadda.
This is it right here. I think this is the main differentiator. At the end of the day whether a person is happy on Linux depends on how much they care about software freedom. I'm willing to put up with the Linux jank because free software is really important to me and aligns with my values.
> Open source yadda yadda.
This is it right here. I think this is the main differentiator. At the end of the day whether a person is happy on Linux depends on how much they care about software freedom. I'm willing to put up with the Linux jank because free software is really important to me and aligns with my values.
I feel like some Linux users (like me) stop noticing the jank over time since we slowly become very adept at coping with it (eg. finding good resources on how to solve the problem so we can find the fix pretty quickly, or just knowing the fix out of experience.
In the end, it gets not so bad. But GUI front ends for package managers, like [especially] GNOME Software are horrendous from my experience. Which is not so great of a look; of all the things that should be user-friendly it should be package management (IMHO). Package manager failures (conflicts, whatever) are handled horribly by GUI front-ends and even then usually require some expertise to fix, which is a pain. At least Fedora Silverblue nails the updates so that stuff usually doesn't break... but of all the things that were broken OOTB for me on my install... it was (duh!) GNOME Software.
In the end, it gets not so bad. But GUI front ends for package managers, like [especially] GNOME Software are horrendous from my experience. Which is not so great of a look; of all the things that should be user-friendly it should be package management (IMHO). Package manager failures (conflicts, whatever) are handled horribly by GUI front-ends and even then usually require some expertise to fix, which is a pain. At least Fedora Silverblue nails the updates so that stuff usually doesn't break... but of all the things that were broken OOTB for me on my install... it was (duh!) GNOME Software.
This is doubly awful because when I show a non-tech user around linux, the thing they're always most impressed by and which is most distinct about the linux experience compared to Win/Mac is the ability to pull arbitrary software from distro repos.
But the GUIs are awful. The cli experience is awful, too, but better and we get used to it. They're never going to get used to it, and why would they want to? I don't know the answer; package management is a complicated problem. But maybe some sort of distributed app-store experience where the package manager also manages marketing for and forums about the apps. See, I really don't know - but having to go to a webpage and read a bunch of marketing material then download, or go to an app store and get descriptions, screenshots, and commentary by other users is somehow a subjectively better experience for non-tech types than "apt-cache search" or its GUI equivalents.
But the GUIs are awful. The cli experience is awful, too, but better and we get used to it. They're never going to get used to it, and why would they want to? I don't know the answer; package management is a complicated problem. But maybe some sort of distributed app-store experience where the package manager also manages marketing for and forums about the apps. See, I really don't know - but having to go to a webpage and read a bunch of marketing material then download, or go to an app store and get descriptions, screenshots, and commentary by other users is somehow a subjectively better experience for non-tech types than "apt-cache search" or its GUI equivalents.
I've been using manjaro and really like it's package manager. The cli stuff is a pain at first, but worth being able to trivially install two parallel python versions. YaST is my second favorite.
The manjaro gui tool also to you do snap/ flatpak. Those two are about as close as you'll get to a district independent package manager.
The manjaro gui tool also to you do snap/ flatpak. Those two are about as close as you'll get to a district independent package manager.
+1 for Yast. Dont expect a pretty UI, function over form here, but is pretty nice to only enter your password once and be able to administer packages, docker, VMs and their tooling, btrfs, network services and so much more.
> I feel like some Linux users (like me) stop noticing the jank over time since we slowly become very adept at coping with it (eg. finding good resources on how to solve the problem so we can find the fix pretty quickly, or just knowing the fix out of experience.
I think that holds true for anything honestly. I never cared much about how annoying it is to install EXEs on windows, visiting each website, clicking through another dialog etc. Neither did I care about the GUI.
Now that I'm using Linux on my personal devices however, I got to like package managers and tiling WMs.
I think that holds true for anything honestly. I never cared much about how annoying it is to install EXEs on windows, visiting each website, clicking through another dialog etc. Neither did I care about the GUI.
Now that I'm using Linux on my personal devices however, I got to like package managers and tiling WMs.
My mum, sister and other poor souls I refuse support to if they don't run Linux are all used to apt, which in 99% of all cases has the solution command as part of the error message.
I care about freedom more than most people using Linux these days.
But from a historical perspective, desktop Linux was only made possible by Nvidia and their closed driver. That's a sad fact. I've been on Linux "desktop" since 1995 or so. There are only two businesses that really gave much of a crap about Linux (other than Red Hat) and those were: id Software and Nvidia. ATI had total garbage for drivers for many many years. Practically up until AMD bought them. I built a HTPC back in 2005 around a passively-cooled ATI card trying to get it silent as possible. The idea was that I would use the Radeon driver on Linux and everything would just work. But it didn't. And I was stuck using Windows.
ATI shares part of the blame for why Linux never made it on the desktop. You can't have one of the two major video card vendors dropping the ball for so long and come out okay.
But from a historical perspective, desktop Linux was only made possible by Nvidia and their closed driver. That's a sad fact. I've been on Linux "desktop" since 1995 or so. There are only two businesses that really gave much of a crap about Linux (other than Red Hat) and those were: id Software and Nvidia. ATI had total garbage for drivers for many many years. Practically up until AMD bought them. I built a HTPC back in 2005 around a passively-cooled ATI card trying to get it silent as possible. The idea was that I would use the Radeon driver on Linux and everything would just work. But it didn't. And I was stuck using Windows.
ATI shares part of the blame for why Linux never made it on the desktop. You can't have one of the two major video card vendors dropping the ball for so long and come out okay.
I agree with you, and I hate it, because Nvidia causes me so many headaches. I've been a full time linux user for a little over 10 years now. I refuse to buy a system with an nvidia card now, because that damn proprietary driver and nvidia's slow moving way of not supporting newest kernels or wayland, makes life hell. I could have avoided some of that pain by sticking with a slow moving or older distro like CentOS, but that brings many other problems. I'm grateful for Nvidia for doing what they do, but I'm pretty stoked for my new AMD card that will get my system back to where I don't have major crashes one to two times per day.
> But from a historical perspective, desktop Linux was only made possible by Nvidia and their closed driver.
Intel Integrated graphics has been around for a long time now, it has open drivers and since its first release, it has been more than adequate for most non-gamers.
Maybe that's just me, but I don't really care that much about NVidia or ATI/AMD, and the state of their drives don't impact my ability to meaningfully use Linux on the desktop.
Intel Integrated graphics has been around for a long time now, it has open drivers and since its first release, it has been more than adequate for most non-gamers.
Maybe that's just me, but I don't really care that much about NVidia or ATI/AMD, and the state of their drives don't impact my ability to meaningfully use Linux on the desktop.
[deleted]
I can't agree with that from a personal level.
I have used KDE Plasma for a few years now and I really don't care much at all about software freedom.
It is ultimately just way better than Windows. Windows 10 is just an embarrassment.
It is ultimately just way better than Windows. Windows 10 is just an embarrassment.
I've been using the same arch + i3 setup for at least 5 years, never had to change my habits due to an update (except thunderbird which is becoming worse and worse). I've lost a lot a lot of time setting up hibernation and sleep and solving broken depencies, but I have never been limited by gui tools, quite the opposite actually, it is easier to use Pacman than what you need to do on windows or mac.
I honestly don't see what I would gain using Mac or windows , except that hibernation works from the start
I honestly don't see what I would gain using Mac or windows , except that hibernation works from the start
Same sentiment here. About 7 years of arch and i3. Machine migrations are literally dd or rysync commands.
I am in love with the fact my OS layer just does not change at all. It's boring and I like it that way.
I am in love with the fact my OS layer just does not change at all. It's boring and I like it that way.
+1
~8-9 years of Ubuntu + i3 (and 11 years on Ubuntu in total), on 4 different laptops (3 Thinkpads), all using the same set of dotfiles and working stably for years.
Installing Linux on a laptop is pretty much painless these days. Also, the neat thing about being able to (re-)store my configs / dotfiles is that I can run my install script on any machine and 5 minutes later the entire machine is completely set up and feels like one of the machines I've been using for years. Back in the 2000s I went through the process of reinstalling Windows a bunch of times and I still remember how painful that was because after installation everything had to be reconfigured and customized in some GUI, which would take hours and never result in quite the same setup I used to have. Now with Linux I've been using the same setup for the past 10 years across machines. (Which is nice as it allows me to tweak my settings over time.)
~8-9 years of Ubuntu + i3 (and 11 years on Ubuntu in total), on 4 different laptops (3 Thinkpads), all using the same set of dotfiles and working stably for years.
Installing Linux on a laptop is pretty much painless these days. Also, the neat thing about being able to (re-)store my configs / dotfiles is that I can run my install script on any machine and 5 minutes later the entire machine is completely set up and feels like one of the machines I've been using for years. Back in the 2000s I went through the process of reinstalling Windows a bunch of times and I still remember how painful that was because after installation everything had to be reconfigured and customized in some GUI, which would take hours and never result in quite the same setup I used to have. Now with Linux I've been using the same setup for the past 10 years across machines. (Which is nice as it allows me to tweak my settings over time.)
> I honestly don't see what I would gain using Mac or windows , except that hibernation works from the start
And even that. My only longer Mac experience was a MBP (2016?) and this machine (and none of my co-workers) wasn't able to re attach a external monitor and external keyboard after hypernating. The time I worked there nobody found a solution
And even that. My only longer Mac experience was a MBP (2016?) and this machine (and none of my co-workers) wasn't able to re attach a external monitor and external keyboard after hypernating. The time I worked there nobody found a solution
> This will be super unpopular, but Linux missed the desktop boat 20 years ago
Desktop Linux in 2021 is nothing like it was 20 years ago. Plasma Desktop is a great experience these days, and in my opinion, surpasses both the Windows and macOS desktop shell experiences while implementing features from both systems.
Desktop Linux in 2021 is nothing like it was 20 years ago. Plasma Desktop is a great experience these days, and in my opinion, surpasses both the Windows and macOS desktop shell experiences while implementing features from both systems.
I just spun up a linux Desktop machine for the first time in almost a decade and agree that Plasma has come a long way but it's still rough around the edges and, well, slow. Not as slow as the Windows UI, but still slower than xfce or the like.
One problem I do have with Plasma (though this may just be how arch packages it) - Dolphin, the native plasma file manager, is not included by default. Yes, I know it's not much of an imposition to do pacman -Sy dolphin but a file manager seems like an integral part of the system to me worthy of being included in the base package for a desktop environment.
Little choices like that affect new user adoption.
One problem I do have with Plasma (though this may just be how arch packages it) - Dolphin, the native plasma file manager, is not included by default. Yes, I know it's not much of an imposition to do pacman -Sy dolphin but a file manager seems like an integral part of the system to me worthy of being included in the base package for a desktop environment.
Little choices like that affect new user adoption.
Try it on openSUSE, the best KDE integration by far IMHO, since it is their standard DE since IDK/forever? Tumbleweed offers the newest packages, rolling like Arch, but with a huge test battery on OBS (https://openbuildservice.org/). Snapshots on upgrade make the thought of breakage (haven't had any) tolerable.
Disclaimer: very happy user
Disclaimer: very happy user
I cut my teeth on openSUSE years and years ago and haven't been back in a while. Maybe ill spin one up in a VM and see how it works.
It is less user friendly/more secure OOTB, in contrast to Ubuntu/Mint, still worth it IMHO, after reading the horror stories about Docker and UFW on Ubuntu.
Getting KDE Connect (Killer feature IMO) to work needed fiddling with the firewall, but while annoying at the time in retrospect it leaves a good impression.
Podman is availlable without jumping through hoops, and nearly everthing i need is availlable via opi (think AUR but mostly official, directly from OBS), if it is not in Tumbleweed allready.
Getting KDE Connect (Killer feature IMO) to work needed fiddling with the firewall, but while annoying at the time in retrospect it leaves a good impression.
Podman is availlable without jumping through hoops, and nearly everthing i need is availlable via opi (think AUR but mostly official, directly from OBS), if it is not in Tumbleweed allready.
Most new users aren't bootstrapping an Arch installation from scratch. I just installed Manjaro a few days ago and it, along with Kubuntu, both ship with Dolphin by default, as does KDE Neon.
In my experience, Plasma Desktop runs well even on old hardware and uses about the same amount of memory as Xfce.
In my experience, Plasma Desktop runs well even on old hardware and uses about the same amount of memory as Xfce.
It's rough around the edges, but have you seen Windows? It's almost hilarious how any component can have UI elements from any of its iterations of the past two decades.
And ask someone who isn't familiar with it to find a setting. It's a hot mess. Just a hot mess a majority of people are used to.
And ask someone who isn't familiar with it to find a setting. It's a hot mess. Just a hot mess a majority of people are used to.
I am such a fan of the way gnome shell reinvented distraction less desktop computing (essentially the thing metro should have been) that I feel sorry for people that can never try it.
Yes Linux desktops have been a complicated topic. But it's incredible easy to build something less distractive than windows 10.
Yes Linux desktops have been a complicated topic. But it's incredible easy to build something less distractive than windows 10.
> Desktop Linux in 2021 is nothing like it was 20 years ago.
True, it's now significantly more complicated and there at least 300 more distros worth of fragmentation. But at least sound finally works!... usually...
True, it's now significantly more complicated and there at least 300 more distros worth of fragmentation. But at least sound finally works!... usually...
Spitballing a wild hypothetical that is probably wrong, but was inspired by what you said so I thought I'd share:
I wonder if the arrival of the 3D revolution was just a little too early for computer nerds to embrace an open source ecosystem from the get-go and how different it would've been if "If you want to run DOOM/Quake/Unreal Tournament then install OpenSUSE/Slackware so you don't have to bother Fiddling with drivers on DOS" would've been more commonplace.
From the 80s to the 2000s, video games became a multi-billion dollar industry that inspired two half-generations of kids to pursue careers in technology, but the world of FOSS was so focused on different use cases that the middle ground of "computer curious" kids probably wasn't as big of a revolution as it could've been.
Hopefully, the work Valve is putting into Proton/WINE + Steam Deck will give us a piece of that alternate history.
I wonder if the arrival of the 3D revolution was just a little too early for computer nerds to embrace an open source ecosystem from the get-go and how different it would've been if "If you want to run DOOM/Quake/Unreal Tournament then install OpenSUSE/Slackware so you don't have to bother Fiddling with drivers on DOS" would've been more commonplace.
From the 80s to the 2000s, video games became a multi-billion dollar industry that inspired two half-generations of kids to pursue careers in technology, but the world of FOSS was so focused on different use cases that the middle ground of "computer curious" kids probably wasn't as big of a revolution as it could've been.
Hopefully, the work Valve is putting into Proton/WINE + Steam Deck will give us a piece of that alternate history.
Proton is already pretty good. I expect it to get better. I've been daily-driving Arch on both a custom-built PC and a ThinkPad for 3 years and I haven't looked back, not even for games.
As someone using Linux on the desktop for a looong time, I don't have any real arguments against any of these except 1(I quite like Gnome).
I think it just comes down to how you uses a computer. I mainly program, web browse, and listen to music. I don't game, watch movies, nor use or want to use 'business' apps. Abiword is about the most business app I use with any regularity. If I -have- to do something else, usually GDocs can handle it.
Re: 5) It might depend on the person. I've only ever used Gimp, and while it has redone the UI multiple times, and some things remain nonintuitive, I find myself around it well enough. When PhotoPea launched with its PS style UI, I wanted to give it a try to see what I was missing. I find myself lost, probably how a PS user feels going into Gimp.
I think it just comes down to how you uses a computer. I mainly program, web browse, and listen to music. I don't game, watch movies, nor use or want to use 'business' apps. Abiword is about the most business app I use with any regularity. If I -have- to do something else, usually GDocs can handle it.
Re: 5) It might depend on the person. I've only ever used Gimp, and while it has redone the UI multiple times, and some things remain nonintuitive, I find myself around it well enough. When PhotoPea launched with its PS style UI, I wanted to give it a try to see what I was missing. I find myself lost, probably how a PS user feels going into Gimp.
> I don't game, watch movies, nor use or want to use 'business' apps. Abiword is about the most business app I use with any regularity. If I -have- to do something else, usually GDocs can handle it.
A lot of the items that GP and you are discussing are, from my perspective, complaints about Linux circa 2005, maybe 2010 in a few cases.
I do all the above things and problems are rare. To the point where I ditched my Windows install for gaming. Steam's work on Proton means games seem to just work with the exception of specific Anti-Cheat software in certain games (and even in those games it's usually just MP that doesn't work).
KDE Plasma gives me basically the Windows 7 desktop interface with whatever window dressing I want and virtual desktop support out of the box. Plus, I can do everything that Linux can without any Windows overhead.
Maybe I'm really lucky re: productivity stuff but honestly I don't have a ton of complaints about it.
A lot of the items that GP and you are discussing are, from my perspective, complaints about Linux circa 2005, maybe 2010 in a few cases.
I do all the above things and problems are rare. To the point where I ditched my Windows install for gaming. Steam's work on Proton means games seem to just work with the exception of specific Anti-Cheat software in certain games (and even in those games it's usually just MP that doesn't work).
KDE Plasma gives me basically the Windows 7 desktop interface with whatever window dressing I want and virtual desktop support out of the box. Plus, I can do everything that Linux can without any Windows overhead.
Maybe I'm really lucky re: productivity stuff but honestly I don't have a ton of complaints about it.
Yeah, I feel like a lot of people who complain about Linux not working well for some things haven't looked at it for 10-15 years. It certainly can't run everything a Windows desktop can, but I think it's caught up meaningfully enough that people who dabbled long ago would find it sufficient for day-to-day use. I don't think it's for everyone; I wouldn't there's even a subset of the software developers I know who probably wouldn't like it, but many of the complaints I hear nowadays are very outdated.
Interestingly, if you like games Linux is by far a better OS than macOS.
Thanks to Valve's Proton, now most Windows games work flawlessly on Linux. When you install them from Steam, you don't even have to know they're Windows binaries, they just work.
Thanks to Valve's Proton, now most Windows games work flawlessly on Linux. When you install them from Steam, you don't even have to know they're Windows binaries, they just work.
A couple of corrections from my perspective (Used Windows since 3.1 in 1995, worked and supported others on Windows until 2012, switched to Linux around 2006 after having used it on and off since 2001):
> There were too many projects with none focusing on really making a better gui than mac/windows.
Many of us have preferred Linux desktops for a decade or two.
Calling a desktop gui better when it lacks the basics like multiple virtual desktops is quite a stretch IMO. Same goes for not being able to update your kernel without getting a brand new desktop environment either you want it or not. Same goes for not being able to customize CMD-tab on Mac.
> A lack of bread and butter 1st class "business" apps
so far so good until this:
> OpenOffice is fine, IF you are ok with the janky ui and no one knowing how it works.
In fact for many years OpenOffice, now Libre Office has been less alien to large segments of the user base.
For a number of things it has also been significantly better at times: I remember very well having to import a certain report patched together by four others to use an actually working styling system.
> lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc server and outlook-like client)
This was a good point for a long time. I can work around it by using my iPad for this these days.
> Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
Having Linux work better on laptops than Windows is the default state for most laptops and have been for a decase. Last big issue was a screen resolution problem solved by installing the 915 driver using synapse on nc6230 or something back in 2006.
Getting a Windows machine to stop lagging unpredictably though, that is job best left for a specialist. Some come working out of the box, but those are the exception.
(Although it should be noted that I hate lagging as much as designers hate misalignment.)
> There were too many projects with none focusing on really making a better gui than mac/windows.
Many of us have preferred Linux desktops for a decade or two.
Calling a desktop gui better when it lacks the basics like multiple virtual desktops is quite a stretch IMO. Same goes for not being able to update your kernel without getting a brand new desktop environment either you want it or not. Same goes for not being able to customize CMD-tab on Mac.
> A lack of bread and butter 1st class "business" apps
so far so good until this:
> OpenOffice is fine, IF you are ok with the janky ui and no one knowing how it works.
In fact for many years OpenOffice, now Libre Office has been less alien to large segments of the user base.
For a number of things it has also been significantly better at times: I remember very well having to import a certain report patched together by four others to use an actually working styling system.
> lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc server and outlook-like client)
This was a good point for a long time. I can work around it by using my iPad for this these days.
> Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
Having Linux work better on laptops than Windows is the default state for most laptops and have been for a decase. Last big issue was a screen resolution problem solved by installing the 915 driver using synapse on nc6230 or something back in 2006.
Getting a Windows machine to stop lagging unpredictably though, that is job best left for a specialist. Some come working out of the box, but those are the exception.
(Although it should be noted that I hate lagging as much as designers hate misalignment.)
I manage hundreds of Linux desktops (VDI, laptops, desktops) and about 75 Windows 10 laptops.
I see at least 25 Windows tickets for every Linux desktop ticket.
Sure I am paid more than an equivalent Windows admin but the ongoing cost of support is far less. Stuff just doesn't randomly stop working like in Windows. It's really nice.
I see at least 25 Windows tickets for every Linux desktop ticket.
Sure I am paid more than an equivalent Windows admin but the ongoing cost of support is far less. Stuff just doesn't randomly stop working like in Windows. It's really nice.
How much of this is because the Linux users are more likely to know how to fix their own stuff/not break it in a weird way compared to the Windows users?
i'll argue it's because any given linux install is less likely to shit all over itself and the filesystem compared to windows.
That may be true, but that doesn't negate the question I was asking. At most companies I've worked at, most of the technical/developer types had OS X or Linux computers, and the people with Windows boxes tended to be people using them more for administrative tasks with Outlook/Excel.
I know I have plenty of small problems with my Linux desktop, same as I have with my old Windows desktops, but I generally know how to fix/learn to fix those without going to a support line. That would be true even if you gave me a Windows computer.
Essentially, if you gave the people filing all the Windows support tickets a Linux machine instead, would that fix the problem? Or is it that those people are more likely to need support help AND also happen to prefer/need Windows.
I know I have plenty of small problems with my Linux desktop, same as I have with my old Windows desktops, but I generally know how to fix/learn to fix those without going to a support line. That would be true even if you gave me a Windows computer.
Essentially, if you gave the people filing all the Windows support tickets a Linux machine instead, would that fix the problem? Or is it that those people are more likely to need support help AND also happen to prefer/need Windows.
None of the users have admin on either set of machines. We are comprised of largely technical individuals.
It's not your average office I'll admit that, but we do have non-technical people on Linux that work help desk and RMA (think $100k networking gear).
Windows Rant Incoming:
Windows Update sucks. It just sucks. I fucking hate it. It fails for no reason, it fails for every reason. With how important updates are for Windows updating should JUST WORK.
I was trying to curate updates via WSUS and then moved to W4B SAC but recently said eff it and just let them update however they want. Just let the updates fail, they'll work eventually. I really don't care anymore or have the energy to.
It's not your average office I'll admit that, but we do have non-technical people on Linux that work help desk and RMA (think $100k networking gear).
Windows Rant Incoming:
Windows Update sucks. It just sucks. I fucking hate it. It fails for no reason, it fails for every reason. With how important updates are for Windows updating should JUST WORK.
I was trying to curate updates via WSUS and then moved to W4B SAC but recently said eff it and just let them update however they want. Just let the updates fail, they'll work eventually. I really don't care anymore or have the energy to.
Yep. If Windows Update isn't destructive enough in how it decides it will reboot and install updates without the user's consent, Windows Update has also ended up bricking systems at times.
It's vile and a pain in the ass to deal with.
Linux/Ubuntu? "Oh, I should update. Okay, Alt+T, sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade"
Done.
It does it when I tell it to and only then.
It's vile and a pain in the ass to deal with.
Linux/Ubuntu? "Oh, I should update. Okay, Alt+T, sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade"
Done.
It does it when I tell it to and only then.
GUI issues are probably the worst but there's also just more that you have to tinker with to fix/adjust on Linux, even on Ubuntu which is likely the most user-friendly distro.
Good luck getting multiple different sized monitors to work well out of the box (e.g. laptop + external) on Linux, sometimes even with tinkering you are left with subpar scaling on one. Mac on the other hand just handles whatever combo of monitors and resolutions you throw at it with nothing that you have to do on your side and has done so for a decade now.
Things are much more likely to eventually break if you use an installation too long - I rarely have issues with 5+ year old Windows but most distros don't even support that, and even if they do good luck getting through all the upgrades without having to tinker. Hell, I have to manually mess with PPAs at least once a year just to apply updates.
There's also just too much choice with so many of the options having drawbacks that are hard to distinguish between, especially for non-power users.
There's a ton of other stuff like that that we Linux users are used to so it's not too bad for us but that cause so many people who get a linux machine from a friend to eventually just pay for a Windows install on it since they can't deal with it..
Good luck getting multiple different sized monitors to work well out of the box (e.g. laptop + external) on Linux, sometimes even with tinkering you are left with subpar scaling on one. Mac on the other hand just handles whatever combo of monitors and resolutions you throw at it with nothing that you have to do on your side and has done so for a decade now.
Things are much more likely to eventually break if you use an installation too long - I rarely have issues with 5+ year old Windows but most distros don't even support that, and even if they do good luck getting through all the upgrades without having to tinker. Hell, I have to manually mess with PPAs at least once a year just to apply updates.
There's also just too much choice with so many of the options having drawbacks that are hard to distinguish between, especially for non-power users.
There's a ton of other stuff like that that we Linux users are used to so it's not too bad for us but that cause so many people who get a linux machine from a friend to eventually just pay for a Windows install on it since they can't deal with it..
> Good luck getting multiple different sized monitors to work well out of the box (e.g. laptop + external) on Linux,
Just Works™ actually. Using a laptop/external simultaneous combo at different resolutions right now, and it's literally perfect. It even gets the scaling right. Not a second of configuration.
Just Works™ actually. Using a laptop/external simultaneous combo at different resolutions right now, and it's literally perfect. It even gets the scaling right. Not a second of configuration.
Lucky. I'm currently on a 20.04 install with a 1080p laptop + 4k, and the scaling options are 100% or 200% for a monitor with fractional scaling I can apply with tinkering that applies to both at the same time. I just sort of have it in a non-optimal for either monitor state but I'm sure there's some way which I didnt find when I first installed it to make it okay. On a different machine and combination of monitors I've gotten it to work but with a lot of xrandr tinkering instead. I'm hopeful that your comment might suggest that next time I upgrade it'll work out of the box.
Ubuntu's upstream and release schedule ensures that its packages are relatively out of date. It might be worth trying 21.04 for real fractional scaling with Wayland or a different distro with recent packages and Wayland.
You're almost certainly right, as far as I can tell it should be fine with Wayland and 21.04 but I am just tired of reinstalling my OS every 6 months and don't trust direct upgrades much since they lose me even more time diagnosing an issue in the cases where they do break something.
I've upgraded a few of my systems from 20.04 to 21.04 without an issue. If you take a btrfs snapshot before upgrading, you can roll back the changes if it turns out there's an issue with them.
It's not lucky, it's just that I know better than to install Ubuntu. Ubuntu's been a bad choice from the beginning and intentionally goes against the defaults of upstream providers. Random corporate distributions never know better than upstream.
Ok, that's fair. Maybe I'll finally decide that Ubuntu has more drawbacks than advantages for me (and it does have both) and finally switch to Debian directly.
This is more than basic functionality, but I'm experiencing limitations with multiple monitors that I don't get in Windows. The bundled remote Screen Sharing in GNOME does not work in that setup. VSync (on NVidia, possibly not a driver issue) doesn't work well, resulting in tearing in one consistent.
Vanilla Fedora user here, after years of Mac and Windows. It works really well these days. Multiple monitors, including a 5k monitor. And personally, I find Gnome to be almost as good as the mainstream desktops and even better in some ways. YMMV.
Gnome shell is the least distracting desktop concept I ever used. I always liked desktops and tiling is to extreme for me. So far everyone I upgraded to gnome shell has been happy since.
Which 5k monitor are you using? Been thinking of upgrading recently and 4k scaled to 1080p doesn't cut it for my 1440p loving needs.
I have the original one made for Mac, with only thunderbolt inputs. It's nice:
- 5k
- Built in webcam
- Built in speakers
- Built in mic
All work on Fedora. Thinking about it now, I realize that I may be overselling it in that I did have to tinker to get brightness adjusting to work. I installed this [0] tool, and mapped +/- to Super +, and Super - so that I can quickly adjust brightness.
So, it's definitely not as seamless a setup as the Mac, but it was honestly not bad at all and is a great setup.
[0] https://github.com/chrisdavies/lg
- 5k
- Built in webcam
- Built in speakers
- Built in mic
All work on Fedora. Thinking about it now, I realize that I may be overselling it in that I did have to tinker to get brightness adjusting to work. I installed this [0] tool, and mapped +/- to Super +, and Super - so that I can quickly adjust brightness.
So, it's definitely not as seamless a setup as the Mac, but it was honestly not bad at all and is a great setup.
[0] https://github.com/chrisdavies/lg
> Good luck getting multiple different sized monitors to work well out of the box (e.g. laptop + external) on Linux, sometimes even with tinkering you are left with subpar scaling on one
It sounds like you might still be using Xorg?
These are all solved problems in Wayland (that is, as long as the applications are native Wayland clients, and not running through XWayland) but some people are still reluctant or unable (see NVidia EGLStream debacle) to migrate yet.
It sounds like you might still be using Xorg?
These are all solved problems in Wayland (that is, as long as the applications are native Wayland clients, and not running through XWayland) but some people are still reluctant or unable (see NVidia EGLStream debacle) to migrate yet.
> Ubuntu which is likely the most user-friendly distro.
I think this is the biggest issue in the Linux user Space. This is simply a wrong assumption for at least a few years now.
Ubuntu, for some reason, tends more break way more dramatic than other distros (usually something with complex deps)
I think this is the biggest issue in the Linux user Space. This is simply a wrong assumption for at least a few years now.
Ubuntu, for some reason, tends more break way more dramatic than other distros (usually something with complex deps)
Linux desktop does not need to be dominant to be relevant. Business apps are important but you seem to forget most people hardly use anything but 1 percent of what Excel or Word can do anyway. I agree that cal, mail situation is not ideal though. Laptops is a no problem if you restrict yourself to certaiin brands.
as for apps, I dont know, Linux is superior in many ways for non GUI work. If you need photoshop then yeah this is not the right OS for you. But I would not want to touch anything Adobe with their dirty subscription models. its not true of all categories though. Krita for digital painting is amazing. Blender for 3d work too. The real answer is... it depends.
as for apps, I dont know, Linux is superior in many ways for non GUI work. If you need photoshop then yeah this is not the right OS for you. But I would not want to touch anything Adobe with their dirty subscription models. its not true of all categories though. Krita for digital painting is amazing. Blender for 3d work too. The real answer is... it depends.
For me as a programmer the biggest issue with Linux on desktop was the wifi thing, you were never sure if it would work out of the box or if you needed to copy some obscure .bin files found on the Internet so that it would work with your wifi adapter. I think I lost a day or two on this about 15 years ago when I last set up a Linux desktop machine for myself.
The second thing (and which you mention) is the laptop install situation, I was never sure if running Linux on whatever laptop would work, and if yes if it would work 100%, meaning no wifi/sound/battery drain issues. That was one of the main reasons that has kept me away from Linux since then. Granted, if Apple goes on its current way of trying to restrict access to its machines I may make the switch back sometime in the near future.
The second thing (and which you mention) is the laptop install situation, I was never sure if running Linux on whatever laptop would work, and if yes if it would work 100%, meaning no wifi/sound/battery drain issues. That was one of the main reasons that has kept me away from Linux since then. Granted, if Apple goes on its current way of trying to restrict access to its machines I may make the switch back sometime in the near future.
I've had the experience you are talking about in the past, But this is mostly gone now. Most of the distros ship with wifi drivers so you can do an internet install.
Most wifi cards on Laptops now are either Intel or Killer. So most distros will ship with these common ones. They also usually ship with universal drivers for things like trackpads and monitors so that at least everything "works" out of the box on a fresh install. However you still are best hunting down specific drivers for your equipment to get the best experience or performance.
My personal experience is that if you use a Dell or Lenovo laptop, that you won't need to worry about compatibility. These two companies in particular seem to have the best linux support so their equipment generally just works. I have found HP to "mostly" work. Good luck with Asus or Gigabyte. I wouldn't even try a lesser brand than those.
Battery life on Linux is a mixed bag. There are tools you can install that can give you incredible control over your battery and drag a battery's life out much longer than you would get from the same laptop on Windows. But you will need to constantly manage it and be aware of it. For example I need to go into the terminal and manually change a profile every time I connect and disconnect from the charger. As opposed to Mac and Windows that mostly manage themselves to get the best performance/battery life ratio. I found that if you don't do anything with Linux and just run it on battery that you will get substantially lower battery life than the same device would give you on Windows.
Most wifi cards on Laptops now are either Intel or Killer. So most distros will ship with these common ones. They also usually ship with universal drivers for things like trackpads and monitors so that at least everything "works" out of the box on a fresh install. However you still are best hunting down specific drivers for your equipment to get the best experience or performance.
My personal experience is that if you use a Dell or Lenovo laptop, that you won't need to worry about compatibility. These two companies in particular seem to have the best linux support so their equipment generally just works. I have found HP to "mostly" work. Good luck with Asus or Gigabyte. I wouldn't even try a lesser brand than those.
Battery life on Linux is a mixed bag. There are tools you can install that can give you incredible control over your battery and drag a battery's life out much longer than you would get from the same laptop on Windows. But you will need to constantly manage it and be aware of it. For example I need to go into the terminal and manually change a profile every time I connect and disconnect from the charger. As opposed to Mac and Windows that mostly manage themselves to get the best performance/battery life ratio. I found that if you don't do anything with Linux and just run it on battery that you will get substantially lower battery life than the same device would give you on Windows.
It's much better now. The last time I had a problem like this was around 2012 on a cheap walmart laptop that I installed Xubuntu 10.04. Mot wireless cards now are Intel or Realtek which are both fine (though Intel is the best).
Especially if you buy a Dell or Lenovo you're in good shape.
WiFi is basically fixed with all modern chips. Same with laptops.
Let's be real you won't buy the cheapest Fujitsu or whatever anyway. You are going to get a proper ThinkPad or something and than Linux is the faster and better working system either way.
Let's be real you won't buy the cheapest Fujitsu or whatever anyway. You are going to get a proper ThinkPad or something and than Linux is the faster and better working system either way.
I bought a usb adapter with the penguin on it. I don't even know what it is called.
That was 5 years ago and I never looked back. I think that adapter is the secret key. Once you have that it doesn't make sense why you wouldn't use KDE Plasma.
I literally only know LS MKDIR and then conda commands. I don't know what any folder does outside of /home. I don't care about these things. Everything has always just worked and if something breaks I can reinstall in about 10 minutes.
The experience people describe on here is what I remember in 1999 when I spent a week trying to get my soundcard to work and gave up.
That was 5 years ago and I never looked back. I think that adapter is the secret key. Once you have that it doesn't make sense why you wouldn't use KDE Plasma.
I literally only know LS MKDIR and then conda commands. I don't know what any folder does outside of /home. I don't care about these things. Everything has always just worked and if something breaks I can reinstall in about 10 minutes.
The experience people describe on here is what I remember in 1999 when I spent a week trying to get my soundcard to work and gave up.
I'm using Linux on various laptops since 2010 and I haven't seen any problems. These are from multiple vendors and categories:
Asus EEE 1005HA
Asus U36G
HP EliteBook 8470p
HP ProBook 430 G6
ThinkPad x220
Acer that I don't remember by model number (I have installed it for others)
Yes, the wifi issue is solved since like 2013. You usually only need to install firmware, which is a standard package from your distribution's repository (some user-friendly distribution even do this for you).
Asus EEE 1005HA
Asus U36G
HP EliteBook 8470p
HP ProBook 430 G6
ThinkPad x220
Acer that I don't remember by model number (I have installed it for others)
Yes, the wifi issue is solved since like 2013. You usually only need to install firmware, which is a standard package from your distribution's repository (some user-friendly distribution even do this for you).
[deleted]
> 2) A lack of bread and butter 1st class "business" apps - you know, office. OpenOffice is fine, IF you are ok with the janky ui and no one knowing how it works.
Having recently reentered the world of the full MS and Office stack, janky shit is the standard. Word - the app, online and teams. None of them work right. The meme where someone thinks they’ll just move an image is accurate. Headers and footers, formatting and most other parts are actually broken or have unpredictable behaviour across apps that are presumably supposed to be the same?
I feel like an old man shouting into a void, but it isn’t right how crappy the industry standard has become.
Having recently reentered the world of the full MS and Office stack, janky shit is the standard. Word - the app, online and teams. None of them work right. The meme where someone thinks they’ll just move an image is accurate. Headers and footers, formatting and most other parts are actually broken or have unpredictable behaviour across apps that are presumably supposed to be the same?
I feel like an old man shouting into a void, but it isn’t right how crappy the industry standard has become.
Your right, teams and office are really very janky. The difference is, if you launched it for the first time without seeing it before, you'd think (if you were a normal person) it looks clean and modern and so on.
You open up OpenOffice for the first time, it looks like software from 10 years ago.
I hate teams with a searing passion, but the thing is though it does break, it looks pretty good doing it.
You open up OpenOffice for the first time, it looks like software from 10 years ago.
I hate teams with a searing passion, but the thing is though it does break, it looks pretty good doing it.
You know, all of those were true at some point, but things change, and not in a good way, but in a way that makes Linux much more competitive.
About your #1, well a few tried and for some people they succeeded, but for most people KDE got about equally good some time ago, and both Windows and MacOS kept getting worse and worse. The result is that KDE is much better than those now.
About #2, with the new Office365, Windows is also lacking a reasonably good outlook-like client. The exchange OWA is a much better alternative now, and you can access it from Linux just as easily as from Windows.
About your #1, well a few tried and for some people they succeeded, but for most people KDE got about equally good some time ago, and both Windows and MacOS kept getting worse and worse. The result is that KDE is much better than those now.
About #2, with the new Office365, Windows is also lacking a reasonably good outlook-like client. The exchange OWA is a much better alternative now, and you can access it from Linux just as easily as from Windows.
Here's the thing, what do you need a desktop to do? I use Gnome 3 on wayland, and I don't really pay attention to the "Desktop", I do 90% of my work in a web browser and a terminal.
I use gimp and inkscape sometimes.
Gnome 3 is perfect for 99% of what I need it to do.
I still own an iPhone, it compliments my Linux laptop well where I do my serious work, the phone is a toy.
I use gimp and inkscape sometimes.
Gnome 3 is perfect for 99% of what I need it to do.
I still own an iPhone, it compliments my Linux laptop well where I do my serious work, the phone is a toy.
Equally or more pertinent: What does an office admin, an assistant merchandiser, a product designer, or a copy editor use their desktop for?
They use a Web browser, email, calendar, word processor, spreadsheet, an image editor, and a dozen smaller proprietary apps that are absolutely essential to their job.
I think it may be the last of those... all the various industry specific apps that are hindering Linux as much as the obvious big players like Microsoft. I think word processing on Linux is fine; but your company's eight year old customized CRM tool will never, ever, be available on anything but Windows. Or specialized document scanner. Or sales commission tracker.
They use a Web browser, email, calendar, word processor, spreadsheet, an image editor, and a dozen smaller proprietary apps that are absolutely essential to their job.
I think it may be the last of those... all the various industry specific apps that are hindering Linux as much as the obvious big players like Microsoft. I think word processing on Linux is fine; but your company's eight year old customized CRM tool will never, ever, be available on anything but Windows. Or specialized document scanner. Or sales commission tracker.
In my experience they don't use "an image editor" or "a spreadsheet program", but there is just exactly one blessed app. If that app is on mac for example, then windows or any other OS is impossible.
When people say that "X has no alternative for Excel", that X includes Windows as well. As a good rule of thumb: If there actually is an alternative on Windows, then there is also one on linux.
When people say that "X has no alternative for Excel", that X includes Windows as well. As a good rule of thumb: If there actually is an alternative on Windows, then there is also one on linux.
Anecdotally, I've done work with a few medium-sized businesses around updating legacy business critical apps now and in at least one case the app just wouldn't run on Windows 10 at all but worked fine in Wine with no special configuration.
Microsoft appears to have taken a step back from their long-held focus of not breaking things on upgrades.
Granted, these clients should not be using Win9x apps still and hoping for compatibility.
Microsoft appears to have taken a step back from their long-held focus of not breaking things on upgrades.
Granted, these clients should not be using Win9x apps still and hoping for compatibility.
Well, good for you (work/pay) and good for them (security/efficiency), win win.
I do feel like this becomes less and less of an issue with many of these bespoke apps becoming web apps. Certainly there are still a lot of old native apps that you might not be able to run on Linux, but there are far fewer of these than there were even 5 or 10 years ago, and especially 15 or 20 years ago when the web browser didn't offer enough functionality to build complex, performant apps.
Agree completely. Back around 2000 my daily driver was running Red Hat, Gnome, and Enlightenment DR16 and it felt like The Future. I still have a linux laptop that I use regularly but honestly don't like it that much compared to Windows.
Considering picking up and older Mac now that the hardware is finally affordable prices as more of it hits the used market. Not sure if I'll leave MacOS on it or install windows or Linux.
Considering picking up and older Mac now that the hardware is finally affordable prices as more of it hits the used market. Not sure if I'll leave MacOS on it or install windows or Linux.
> Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
Sadly, it still is. I have a System76 Oryx running the manufacturers distro and I still have issues with hybrid graphics, Wifi breaking randomly, Bluetooth devices not connecting, and the the fans spinning up like crazy and the UI freezing for seconds at a time. On a laptop built for Linux! I still like it but I can't tell anyone it "just works"
Sadly, it still is. I have a System76 Oryx running the manufacturers distro and I still have issues with hybrid graphics, Wifi breaking randomly, Bluetooth devices not connecting, and the the fans spinning up like crazy and the UI freezing for seconds at a time. On a laptop built for Linux! I still like it but I can't tell anyone it "just works"
> Sadly, it still is. I have a System76 Oryx running the manufacturers distro and I still have issues with hybrid graphics, Wifi breaking randomly, Bluetooth devices not connecting, and the the fans spinning up like crazy and the UI freezing for seconds at a time. On a laptop built for Linux! I still like it but I can't tell anyone it "just works"
I mean, my laptop is a MSI GS65 and :
- fans spin up like crazy randomly
- if I plug an ethernet cable, I have to disable & reenable the adapter on windows
- sometimes on reboot the mousepad won't work and I have to power off and wait and power back on
- sometimes on reboot the HDMI won't work and I have to power off and wait and power back on
and all this on Windows, Linux also have the two last problems (though much less since some recent kernels) but not the two first.
Laptops just suck.
I mean, my laptop is a MSI GS65 and :
- fans spin up like crazy randomly
- if I plug an ethernet cable, I have to disable & reenable the adapter on windows
- sometimes on reboot the mousepad won't work and I have to power off and wait and power back on
- sometimes on reboot the HDMI won't work and I have to power off and wait and power back on
and all this on Windows, Linux also have the two last problems (though much less since some recent kernels) but not the two first.
Laptops just suck.
dang, this is seriously disappointing. have you alerted system76 support? they have been known to fix drivers, so worth reporting.
I've been using Lenovo Thinkpad's with no problems at all. I just ordered a Frame.Work laptop that I'm stoked for. Hopefully it goes well.
I've been using Lenovo Thinkpad's with no problems at all. I just ordered a Frame.Work laptop that I'm stoked for. Hopefully it goes well.
My dell e5470 will bluescreen 80% of time when connecting a screen via HDMI on windows 10. Nothing like that happens under linux. The "it just works on other platform" is a myth - they all suck in different ways.
In its beginning, Apple marketed its computers as easier to use. The GUI was a selling strategy. Applications tied themselves to the GUI and suddenly consumers were buying a computer to use Adobe products, with a little browsing and e-mail on the side.
Eventually, competitive pressure forced Microsoft to develop ("heavily borrow") a GUI. All sarcasms aside, mWindows has become usable. But this GUI is a heavy cost.
GNU-Linux is a success. For the generations of people who were sold "a GUI", Linux is often seen as too hard. But for people who found easy access to compilers and other tools through GNU-Linux, there is nothing better.
There is room for all these operating systems, obviously. As for which one is best, there is no contest in my mind. The one that does not lock me in and lets me build what I need is an easy winner.
Eventually, competitive pressure forced Microsoft to develop ("heavily borrow") a GUI. All sarcasms aside, mWindows has become usable. But this GUI is a heavy cost.
GNU-Linux is a success. For the generations of people who were sold "a GUI", Linux is often seen as too hard. But for people who found easy access to compilers and other tools through GNU-Linux, there is nothing better.
There is room for all these operating systems, obviously. As for which one is best, there is no contest in my mind. The one that does not lock me in and lets me build what I need is an easy winner.
> Fragmented gui development. There were too many projects with none focusing on really making a better gui than mac/windows.
Not really true. Windows has copied loads of stuff from Linux GUIs over the years. I began to notice this around Windows Vista.
> A lack of bread and butter 1st class "business" apps - you know, office. OpenOffice is fine, IF you are ok with the janky ui and no one knowing how it works
This is valid. Shouldn't be so bad today with web apps being a thing.
> lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc server and outlook-like client). Holy fudge, I tried to get this going and people just crapped on me for suggesting it.
Yeah, because MS locks other mail clients out. Thunderbird is an excellent email client. Outlook is some proprietary business messaging thing that also happens to support email (badly).
Not really true. Windows has copied loads of stuff from Linux GUIs over the years. I began to notice this around Windows Vista.
> A lack of bread and butter 1st class "business" apps - you know, office. OpenOffice is fine, IF you are ok with the janky ui and no one knowing how it works
This is valid. Shouldn't be so bad today with web apps being a thing.
> lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc server and outlook-like client). Holy fudge, I tried to get this going and people just crapped on me for suggesting it.
Yeah, because MS locks other mail clients out. Thunderbird is an excellent email client. Outlook is some proprietary business messaging thing that also happens to support email (badly).
Fragmented meaning if I was taking a year or 2 to get a code base up for a linux port, I have to take one of a few roads. 1, my app is specialized enough where we dictate the rules and probably it runs well on just one distro, or I have to account for all the different flavors of GUI and windowing systems to target users with their current setups. The former I think happened all the time with specific apps, the latter kept commercial devs far away.
I think the situation is less bad now, but my point was the boat had mostly sailed.
--
Thunderbird is fine (i use it daily), but nothing touches the functionality of outlook (on windows - not the limited versions that exist on the web and elsewhere). And I was as anti MS as anyone back then, but once I had to actually implement exchange servers as part of my job vs using sendmail and a bunch of random crap - there was just no contest. I always knew it was important, but it really is the killer business app.
And now that you dont need to hire 1.5 people minimum to manage it, and pay for servers and infrastructure etc to get the benefits, it is now more a killer app than ever, to those who need it. (really, I hope to never manage on-location exchange ever again)
--
I think the situation is less bad now, but my point was the boat had mostly sailed.
--
Thunderbird is fine (i use it daily), but nothing touches the functionality of outlook (on windows - not the limited versions that exist on the web and elsewhere). And I was as anti MS as anyone back then, but once I had to actually implement exchange servers as part of my job vs using sendmail and a bunch of random crap - there was just no contest. I always knew it was important, but it really is the killer business app.
And now that you dont need to hire 1.5 people minimum to manage it, and pay for servers and infrastructure etc to get the benefits, it is now more a killer app than ever, to those who need it. (really, I hope to never manage on-location exchange ever again)
--
> There were too many projects with none focusing on really making a better gui than mac/windows.
I don't think the target is "better than mac/windows", but I'd argue KDE focuses a lot on making a good UI. Read [1] a bit, you'll see that a lot of work is done on fixing usability bugs and bringing small improvements to an already great desktop environment.
By the way, I've entered in a store that sells computers and noticed the Windows laptops. I was shocked to see myself think "Wait, are they selling computers on Plasma now?". If think it was Windows 11, it's amazing to see that it really resembles Plasma with a white theme.
[1] https://pointieststick.com/
I don't think the target is "better than mac/windows", but I'd argue KDE focuses a lot on making a good UI. Read [1] a bit, you'll see that a lot of work is done on fixing usability bugs and bringing small improvements to an already great desktop environment.
By the way, I've entered in a store that sells computers and noticed the Windows laptops. I was shocked to see myself think "Wait, are they selling computers on Plasma now?". If think it was Windows 11, it's amazing to see that it really resembles Plasma with a white theme.
[1] https://pointieststick.com/
> Gimp is fine, but it has never been close to photoshop.
You can use photoshop cc on linux
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl3Pa8udFQQ
You can use photoshop cc on linux
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl3Pa8udFQQ
Krita, while originally focused on painting, is also worth a try for image editing. It has effect layers missing in Gimp, and an easy to grasp GUI.
In terms of UI or actually under the hood?
I've found PhotoGIMP makes GIMP UI more like Photoshop, which helps me a lot: https://github.com/Diolinux/PhotoGIMP/releases
On a Mac I switched from Photoshop to Pixelmator no problem. Hoping PhotoGimp can help me do the same.
I've found PhotoGIMP makes GIMP UI more like Photoshop, which helps me a lot: https://github.com/Diolinux/PhotoGIMP/releases
On a Mac I switched from Photoshop to Pixelmator no problem. Hoping PhotoGimp can help me do the same.
Photoshop CC runs in wine as of the last time I checked, although I think some tweaking was needed?
Gonna be one of those to disagree to some extent.
I flirted with Linux but never used it full time until about 2017 when the C710 Chromebook came out. What I really wanted was a basic laptop that was cheap enough to toss into a bag. So I nuked ChromeOS and started using ChrUbuntu.
Windows 10 had been out for about 2 years by that point and it became an increasing source of frustration, but I also knew I couldn't stay on Windows 7 forever.
What surprised me was that I came to prefer using my ChrUbuntu laptop despite having a much, much, MUCH more powerful desktop.
Windows 10 broke me. Why? How?
Inconsistency in the UI. Still finding old shit buried under several layers of new shit. It was still all shit in the end.
Ads in the Start Menu.
Haphazard driver support.
Forced updates and starts. Kind of a problem when you're trying to do a 17 hour overnight render job, y'know...
The problems I had in Windows just didn't seem to exist in Linux. The things people said "Oh, you have to go to the command line to fix everything" didn't seem to ring true at all. The memes, stereotypes, the disclaimers and talking points, all of it, were badly out of date. With Ubuntu, I could install from LiveUSB, entirely graphical, go through less steps during the installation process compared to Windows and still install software like Steam, vendor specific drivers and other stuff without ever touching the command line. AND Ubuntu doesn't piss me off by forcing me to restart when I don't want to.
After that, I continued to have BSOD's in Windows 10 with hardware that ran flawlessly under Ubuntu.
Networking, filesystem management was slower in Windows 10. I didn't have any issue getting Samba working in Linux to use with the NAS drives during video editing and transfer.
Google Drive was more than good enough when it came to office file compatibility. In the production house I worked out of, it came to be the preferred method. Gone was the Office shackles... and rightly so, after decades of email attachments being the viral vector for Windows systems, it's safer to just share a Drive link.
It was also because of the overhead of management that the house ended up switching from Outlook/Exchange to GoogleApps completely.
The more we did online, the less it mattered what type of system we were using.
The last, and still current, issue we still had? Adobe. After Apple's Final Cut fiasco, Adobe's failure to provide themselves as an alternative on Linux based setups was a major disappointment.
So, at this point... I have a separate airgapped Windows 7 box that runs my offline Adobe CS apps. They don't get updated and they don't need to be. (Why Win 7? Windows 10 BSODs on that box, too.)
Recently did an upgrade on my main system as well. Had a Ryzen 7 2700X setup that ran great for 3 years. Decided to make that my Windows 10 sidebox for apps that still don't quite work under Wine (though Proton is really helping to reduce that number of apps) and... yep. Have gotten hard freezes and BSODs for the first time when all I did was format the SSD to put Windows 10 on it.
Windows is decades of crap compressed into an OS. Despite having started with MSDos5.0 and Windows 3.0, using WinNT4 through to Win7 as my primary and only OS... I find Windows cumbersome, clunky, kludgy and badly implemented compared to where Ubuntu is today.
Year of the Linux desktop? Fuck off. People repeat that like it's some great joke, but the honest truth is... I use Linux now despite never having had a Linux background because it is less annoying to use than Windows.
I flirted with Linux but never used it full time until about 2017 when the C710 Chromebook came out. What I really wanted was a basic laptop that was cheap enough to toss into a bag. So I nuked ChromeOS and started using ChrUbuntu.
Windows 10 had been out for about 2 years by that point and it became an increasing source of frustration, but I also knew I couldn't stay on Windows 7 forever.
What surprised me was that I came to prefer using my ChrUbuntu laptop despite having a much, much, MUCH more powerful desktop.
Windows 10 broke me. Why? How?
Inconsistency in the UI. Still finding old shit buried under several layers of new shit. It was still all shit in the end.
Ads in the Start Menu.
Haphazard driver support.
Forced updates and starts. Kind of a problem when you're trying to do a 17 hour overnight render job, y'know...
The problems I had in Windows just didn't seem to exist in Linux. The things people said "Oh, you have to go to the command line to fix everything" didn't seem to ring true at all. The memes, stereotypes, the disclaimers and talking points, all of it, were badly out of date. With Ubuntu, I could install from LiveUSB, entirely graphical, go through less steps during the installation process compared to Windows and still install software like Steam, vendor specific drivers and other stuff without ever touching the command line. AND Ubuntu doesn't piss me off by forcing me to restart when I don't want to.
After that, I continued to have BSOD's in Windows 10 with hardware that ran flawlessly under Ubuntu.
Networking, filesystem management was slower in Windows 10. I didn't have any issue getting Samba working in Linux to use with the NAS drives during video editing and transfer.
Google Drive was more than good enough when it came to office file compatibility. In the production house I worked out of, it came to be the preferred method. Gone was the Office shackles... and rightly so, after decades of email attachments being the viral vector for Windows systems, it's safer to just share a Drive link.
It was also because of the overhead of management that the house ended up switching from Outlook/Exchange to GoogleApps completely.
The more we did online, the less it mattered what type of system we were using.
The last, and still current, issue we still had? Adobe. After Apple's Final Cut fiasco, Adobe's failure to provide themselves as an alternative on Linux based setups was a major disappointment.
So, at this point... I have a separate airgapped Windows 7 box that runs my offline Adobe CS apps. They don't get updated and they don't need to be. (Why Win 7? Windows 10 BSODs on that box, too.)
Recently did an upgrade on my main system as well. Had a Ryzen 7 2700X setup that ran great for 3 years. Decided to make that my Windows 10 sidebox for apps that still don't quite work under Wine (though Proton is really helping to reduce that number of apps) and... yep. Have gotten hard freezes and BSODs for the first time when all I did was format the SSD to put Windows 10 on it.
Windows is decades of crap compressed into an OS. Despite having started with MSDos5.0 and Windows 3.0, using WinNT4 through to Win7 as my primary and only OS... I find Windows cumbersome, clunky, kludgy and badly implemented compared to where Ubuntu is today.
Year of the Linux desktop? Fuck off. People repeat that like it's some great joke, but the honest truth is... I use Linux now despite never having had a Linux background because it is less annoying to use than Windows.
>I didn't have any issue getting Samba working in Linux to use with the NAS drives during video editing and transfer.
I switched to sshfs as soon as I migrated my home infrastructure to Linux. It's much faster compared to Samba at least if you have low performance hardware on the NAS side. I wanted authentication and you don't have to fiddle with Kerberos.
I switched to sshfs as soon as I migrated my home infrastructure to Linux. It's much faster compared to Samba at least if you have low performance hardware on the NAS side. I wanted authentication and you don't have to fiddle with Kerberos.
> Windows 10 broke me
mWindows 11 will be the greatest Windows yet, said Redmond marketing.
Linux is the only reason why I ever discovered a love for programming and computing.
mWindows 11 will be the greatest Windows yet, said Redmond marketing.
Linux is the only reason why I ever discovered a love for programming and computing.
those software you mentioned that are on Linux are opensource. You're really comparing corporate developed software to a software that was developed by a community for free. It's like you're comparing apples to oranges. And this statement is really old, I've seen it in years. Linux apps are better now and gives more functionality and control than bloated apps on Windows and Mac.
Of course, Gimp will never be close to Photoshop because it never aimed to be
Of course, Gimp will never be close to Photoshop because it never aimed to be
1) Fragmented gui
Question of taste. Really. If you like an os inspired by sonic the hedgehog, Mac and windows is for you.
2) A lack of bread and butter 1st class
What are you lacking? OpenOffice not good enough? Use softmaker. Does windows actually have an SSH by now?
3) lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc
Evolution, Thunderbird and a few proprietary ones
4) Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
I had not had a problem in 20 years
5) Just, apps, in general. Gimp is fine, but it has
Fair point. I have used Photoshop with wine for some specific color maps
Question of taste. Really. If you like an os inspired by sonic the hedgehog, Mac and windows is for you.
2) A lack of bread and butter 1st class
What are you lacking? OpenOffice not good enough? Use softmaker. Does windows actually have an SSH by now?
3) lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc
Evolution, Thunderbird and a few proprietary ones
4) Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
I had not had a problem in 20 years
5) Just, apps, in general. Gimp is fine, but it has
Fair point. I have used Photoshop with wine for some specific color maps
1) is 2 points (the second touched on by point 5). 1st, it makes development stupid if you have moving targets (not as bad today, but ffs it was horrible in the early days). 2nd is 99.99% of consumer computer users have a hard enough time with OS GUIs that hold their hand - the fact I cannot sit someone down to any 3 random linux machines and have the same experience (again MUCH worse 20 years ago) means it can never make desktop inroads.
2) here is where peoples blind spots can be, but they really reallllly don't understand that MS made some apps that basically need to be aped feature for feature to allow for migration to linux as a desktop. Again touching on familiarity (as in with the gui) but also feature set. People who make money writing certain things can't use certain apps because the features needed by those users don't exist because the software (at the time it needed to be) wasn't mature enough.
3) Thunderbird and evolution are not replacements for outlook. Exchange/outlook had database backed mail and calendaring. No one to this day is even remotely close. Not google, not anyone. This is the biggest app in business for better or worse. Not only did you have database backed calendaring and email, but you also had ridiculously fine-grained group policy management, and way better tools for retention (and this is actually a bfd) If an oss replacement had been made 15-20 years ago the computing landscape would be hugely different.
Only windows gets the full feature set to this day - ios/mac/android/web all don't get the full thing (because no/limited GPOs)
There WAS a project called zimbra or something, and I think they knew replacing exchange was a holy grail (and wanted to benefit monetarily), but iirc it was a paid thing, and never took off in any meaningful way.
4) remember, you, we, are not 99.99% of computer users. I have had hmm, 4 linux laptops over the years, and while fine, it was never problem free. Driver support mostly came down to age and brand, most of them were Dells.
2) here is where peoples blind spots can be, but they really reallllly don't understand that MS made some apps that basically need to be aped feature for feature to allow for migration to linux as a desktop. Again touching on familiarity (as in with the gui) but also feature set. People who make money writing certain things can't use certain apps because the features needed by those users don't exist because the software (at the time it needed to be) wasn't mature enough.
3) Thunderbird and evolution are not replacements for outlook. Exchange/outlook had database backed mail and calendaring. No one to this day is even remotely close. Not google, not anyone. This is the biggest app in business for better or worse. Not only did you have database backed calendaring and email, but you also had ridiculously fine-grained group policy management, and way better tools for retention (and this is actually a bfd) If an oss replacement had been made 15-20 years ago the computing landscape would be hugely different.
Only windows gets the full feature set to this day - ios/mac/android/web all don't get the full thing (because no/limited GPOs)
There WAS a project called zimbra or something, and I think they knew replacing exchange was a holy grail (and wanted to benefit monetarily), but iirc it was a paid thing, and never took off in any meaningful way.
4) remember, you, we, are not 99.99% of computer users. I have had hmm, 4 linux laptops over the years, and while fine, it was never problem free. Driver support mostly came down to age and brand, most of them were Dells.
Lack of software is such a one sided argument always. As Linux user it took me forever to find proper alternatives on a Mac and I still have no idea how and if I can replace and use some for me common things on windows. Which is the only OS I can't get looking like I want to either way
a little hyperbolic - a lot of high-end post production apps and audio apps all made it over
...and some very expensive (6-figure prices - per year) IC design software is Linux-only. Look at Cadence Virtuoso, for example. Not available on Windows nor Mac.
...and some very expensive (6-figure prices - per year) IC design software is Linux-only. Look at Cadence Virtuoso, for example. Not available on Windows nor Mac.
i learned recently that gimp has a command palette that you can access by pressing the / key. this might sound a bit over the top but its been a game changer for me. no more having to scan though icons looking for whatever tool, just type something like /crop. its makes it very quick to create or delete layers, open things like levels, colour balance etc
I'm surprised the photoshop doesn't have the same feature. it would makes things so much easier for online tutorials just to name the tool or setting instead of having to list out the full location in the file menu (which is something that might be subject to change in future versions)
I'm surprised the photoshop doesn't have the same feature. it would makes things so much easier for online tutorials just to name the tool or setting instead of having to list out the full location in the file menu (which is something that might be subject to change in future versions)
> 4) Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
It still is. I mean it will sort of work, but power management, battery management, and even obvious things like swap drives may just not work right after install.
It still is. I mean it will sort of work, but power management, battery management, and even obvious things like swap drives may just not work right after install.
I manage 1000s of Windows servers from my Linux laptop and desktop. I also manage 1000s of Linux boxes too.
I don't denigrate your approach with Windows but please don't tell me I can't do x because I literally can on Linux.
My Linux devices are often domain joined - I log into an AD (used to be eDirectory but wth) I don't care. AD is quite a decent LDAP directory - not as good as eDir though but I doubt many here are capable of discussing that little number. I make huge use of Kerberos - all my browsers can connect to my Apaches etc with SSO if I so wish. Let's Encrypt and putting AD and vCentre CA certs into the various places like /usr/local/share/whatever and running the maint script keeps the browsers from getting upset.
I used to have email via GroupWise but we moved to Exchange back in the day (2011 from memory) I've used Evolution EWS since then. Provided you get your endpoints and DNS in line then you can use Kerberos, otherwise it's NTLM ... lol. You can put Exchange behind HA Proxy. That gets you loads of extra goodies like being able to hide squidgy bits and upping the SSL/TLS to the point where you can make say Exchange 2013 PCI/DSS compliant.
I have no idea why you fixate on GIMP, there are so many graphics apps available it is quite embarrassing. Have a look at say Krita.
Ditch OpenOffice. LibreOffice is capable and where the development is happening. Back in the day I was a MS Office trainer (and a few other things). I know what leading and kerning actually means and dealing with hanging indents, n and m dashes and all the rest. Upper case used to be stored in the upper row of cases in a printer's workshop, leading was shims of lead to move letters up and down. I taught Lotus 1-2-3 macros to company execs as well as Super Calc and even Excel. I can write macros in more languages badly than I care to recall. I wrote a Finite Capacity Scheduler (yes: finite) in Excel VBA for a pie factory near Plymouth. I'm quite happy with LO. It's quite capable in my opinion.
I've got loads of CAD options - I'm a fan of 3D printing. LibreCAD and OpenSCAD are absolutely belting and getting better every month. Blender is quite capable I'm told. I have not even started on that little number but I gather it is absolutely the dog's nadgers. Apparently film studios use it.
I have so many high quality options available to me using Linux. I'm 50 years old. I've used computers from ZX80 and I still have a Commodore 64 (with a USB interface now). My first real PC was a 8086. I managed to get a cracked copy of AutoCAD to work on my 80286 with a 80287 co-processor that my parents bought me for my birthday at something like £120 back in 1987ish.
I'm a sysadmin so not too fussed about IDEs but there are an absolute shitload of them available. Bear in mind the real difference between a Linux distro and Windows and Apples: We've always had an appstore and it is part of the system and not a bolt on.
When I type:
I've seen Windows updates last for days at worst. At best it takes at least 15 minutes. On average you'll need around 30 mins except for Defender updates.
So:
1) Take your pick - for me KDE 2) LO for Office apps. There are so many first class apps it's hard to create a starting point 3) Evo + EWS. OK I'll accept that there is only one app here. You do get all functionality including calendar. You also have more options for notifications 4) Really? 5) You have access to a ridiculous amount of software from a central source
I think that open source has already surpassed closed source stuff by quite a long way. I own my own company and live and die by my choices. I've been doing IT for about 30 years and for about the last 15 of those I have not used MS software on my personal gear.
I wrote this a while back but I do keep it up to date: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Intranet - might be handy for someone integrating Linux in a Windows world.
I don't denigrate your approach with Windows but please don't tell me I can't do x because I literally can on Linux.
My Linux devices are often domain joined - I log into an AD (used to be eDirectory but wth) I don't care. AD is quite a decent LDAP directory - not as good as eDir though but I doubt many here are capable of discussing that little number. I make huge use of Kerberos - all my browsers can connect to my Apaches etc with SSO if I so wish. Let's Encrypt and putting AD and vCentre CA certs into the various places like /usr/local/share/whatever and running the maint script keeps the browsers from getting upset.
I used to have email via GroupWise but we moved to Exchange back in the day (2011 from memory) I've used Evolution EWS since then. Provided you get your endpoints and DNS in line then you can use Kerberos, otherwise it's NTLM ... lol. You can put Exchange behind HA Proxy. That gets you loads of extra goodies like being able to hide squidgy bits and upping the SSL/TLS to the point where you can make say Exchange 2013 PCI/DSS compliant.
I have no idea why you fixate on GIMP, there are so many graphics apps available it is quite embarrassing. Have a look at say Krita.
Ditch OpenOffice. LibreOffice is capable and where the development is happening. Back in the day I was a MS Office trainer (and a few other things). I know what leading and kerning actually means and dealing with hanging indents, n and m dashes and all the rest. Upper case used to be stored in the upper row of cases in a printer's workshop, leading was shims of lead to move letters up and down. I taught Lotus 1-2-3 macros to company execs as well as Super Calc and even Excel. I can write macros in more languages badly than I care to recall. I wrote a Finite Capacity Scheduler (yes: finite) in Excel VBA for a pie factory near Plymouth. I'm quite happy with LO. It's quite capable in my opinion.
I've got loads of CAD options - I'm a fan of 3D printing. LibreCAD and OpenSCAD are absolutely belting and getting better every month. Blender is quite capable I'm told. I have not even started on that little number but I gather it is absolutely the dog's nadgers. Apparently film studios use it.
I have so many high quality options available to me using Linux. I'm 50 years old. I've used computers from ZX80 and I still have a Commodore 64 (with a USB interface now). My first real PC was a 8086. I managed to get a cracked copy of AutoCAD to work on my 80286 with a 80287 co-processor that my parents bought me for my birthday at something like £120 back in 1987ish.
I'm a sysadmin so not too fussed about IDEs but there are an absolute shitload of them available. Bear in mind the real difference between a Linux distro and Windows and Apples: We've always had an appstore and it is part of the system and not a bolt on.
When I type:
# emerge -Uve --deep --newuse @world
# yay -Syu
# apt update && apt upgrade
I've seen Windows updates last for days at worst. At best it takes at least 15 minutes. On average you'll need around 30 mins except for Defender updates.
So:
1) Take your pick - for me KDE 2) LO for Office apps. There are so many first class apps it's hard to create a starting point 3) Evo + EWS. OK I'll accept that there is only one app here. You do get all functionality including calendar. You also have more options for notifications 4) Really? 5) You have access to a ridiculous amount of software from a central source
I think that open source has already surpassed closed source stuff by quite a long way. I own my own company and live and die by my choices. I've been doing IT for about 30 years and for about the last 15 of those I have not used MS software on my personal gear.
I wrote this a while back but I do keep it up to date: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Intranet - might be handy for someone integrating Linux in a Windows world.
> This will be super unpopular, but Linux missed the desktop boat 20 years ago,
Nothing to feel bad about saying. As a mass-market option it absolutely did. There was no flood of new users coming along back then, and there wont be this time around either.
But for me as a developer, I still think a Linux-desktop is the best desktop I can get. So that's what I'm going to use.
And that's all I care about. That the wider masses run Windows or MacOS doesn't really bother me at all. After all, why should it?
Nothing to feel bad about saying. As a mass-market option it absolutely did. There was no flood of new users coming along back then, and there wont be this time around either.
But for me as a developer, I still think a Linux-desktop is the best desktop I can get. So that's what I'm going to use.
And that's all I care about. That the wider masses run Windows or MacOS doesn't really bother me at all. After all, why should it?
I personally find gnomes keyboard driven Ux to be the best option out there. Managing multiple workspaces/desktops in Mac is almost as good, but isn’t even close in windows.
Foss projects do need to attract more ux designers though. I was telling a friend the other day about how amazing blender is… but had to admit it was so unintuitive/un-discoverable that you can’t really use the program without going through fairly specific tutorials for what you are trying to do
Foss projects do need to attract more ux designers though. I was telling a friend the other day about how amazing blender is… but had to admit it was so unintuitive/un-discoverable that you can’t really use the program without going through fairly specific tutorials for what you are trying to do
As much as I enjoy my System 76 Linux laptop where everything, including CUDA setup for the GPU “just works,” I find a M1 MacBook Pro just makes more sense for my workflow. For fun, I have a very small Lenovo Chromebook that is a partial replacement for my iPad for web surfing and consuming media, and the Linux container support also just works when I want that, and with a nice UI.
And right when Ubuntu would have become up to paar with Windows, bahm, Unity came, Alt+Tab didn’t work, the docker didn’t accept new icons, the Meta key blanked the screen (to display a search bar full-screen) and we were back to a young buggy desktop again. Linux is the ever-restarting progress.
What the Linux desktops lacked is powerful leadership, period.
What the Linux desktops lacked is powerful leadership, period.
This might be true about Ubuntu. But what about Fedora? Manjaro? Arch? Or even Debian?
I would only recommend Ubuntu to people I dislike.
I would only recommend Ubuntu to people I dislike.
RE 2 and 3: browser apps will do the trick once they mature. I hate office on the web because of the horrible UI legacy ported from the desktop, but it's still an impressive implementation. Another example would be chromebooks with google docs. Google docs is really really well with much less of the legacy bloat others have.
> I manage hundreds of linux servers... from my windows desktop and mac laptop.
Exactly. Except I am quite pleased how OpenOffice is right now, but I digress back to agreeing with you.
I use Linux everywhere, just rarely on bare metal. All the linux I use is in memory somewhere. My bare metal machine recreational and general use machine is Mac. It runs Windows but it hasn't in two years.
The OS isn't the hill I'm here to die on. Its just the fact of life.
Gimp. I shudder at the thought. Honestly at this point, I feel the same about Gimp as I do about people clinging onto to pre-subscription Photoshop. Its like these arbitrary and clueless bragging points they now both have to rationalize life choices - whether it is an attempt to stick it to the man because they became the get of my lawn people resistant to change without realizing it, or because they actually can't afford it and this is also a byproduct of their life decisions. In either scenario, there seems to be a lack of observation that the commercial products are lightyears ahead now and there is no point in intentionally inconveniencing yourself for a cause nobody else cares about.
Exactly. Except I am quite pleased how OpenOffice is right now, but I digress back to agreeing with you.
I use Linux everywhere, just rarely on bare metal. All the linux I use is in memory somewhere. My bare metal machine recreational and general use machine is Mac. It runs Windows but it hasn't in two years.
The OS isn't the hill I'm here to die on. Its just the fact of life.
Gimp. I shudder at the thought. Honestly at this point, I feel the same about Gimp as I do about people clinging onto to pre-subscription Photoshop. Its like these arbitrary and clueless bragging points they now both have to rationalize life choices - whether it is an attempt to stick it to the man because they became the get of my lawn people resistant to change without realizing it, or because they actually can't afford it and this is also a byproduct of their life decisions. In either scenario, there seems to be a lack of observation that the commercial products are lightyears ahead now and there is no point in intentionally inconveniencing yourself for a cause nobody else cares about.
Regarding number 5, I would highly recommend trying out Photopea.com
It's basically Photoshop inside browser (works offline) and I have been using it for creating all my screenshots and icons for my app store listings for 3 years now. It's built by a solo developer.
I agree that there are many apps missing on Linux.
But that depends on the type of users: for devs & office workers, I think Google suite can replace MS Office and many Internet apps can help with many other types of everyday app that's available on Mac or Window.
But that depends on the type of users: for devs & office workers, I think Google suite can replace MS Office and many Internet apps can help with many other types of everyday app that's available on Mac or Window.
I completely agree with this assessment. I hate data-lock ins, from the proprietary applications, but the "open source" equivalents have inconsistent UI. Open Office, for example, never rebranded itself or had similar effects to MS Office.
What audio apps made it over? Audio is a gaping hole in Linux land. No drivers, no major support, no major DAW's, etc.. I can't move to linux primarily because of audio... not because of the other stuff you mentioned.
bitwig and reaper are major daw's imo
This is why musicians are almost uniformly on macOS. I love Linux and I've been using it since 1998, but there's a lot of work to be done on the audio front for them to catch up to Apple.
Agree to disagree partially. Bitwig is a major DAW, runs on Ubuntu. Native Instruments interfaces have their drivers in the kernel. YMMV with other DAWs/interfaces though.
[deleted]
The latest versions of LibreOffice are really quite good. They have implemented the Ribbon-style nav as an option and have some decent default styles. I was pleasantly surprised when I last used it.
You're not wrong (you're probably right in the context of the article which focuses on "desktop from MacOS"), but in my opinion here we're once more generalizing too much => I think that being happy with Linux and as well distro [X] is linked to the type of work you do & the type of person you are.
On one hand telling a random MacOS/Winows-person to switch to Linux is most probably NOK. Image&video editing & office apps and probably other stuff (doubts about audio apps - I loved Linux+"Jack"+filters when playing guitar as an amateur) are not as good as on those OSs.
On the other hand telling the same to a techy guy/girl >might< be OK. E.g. a huge amount of programming languages can be installed & handled very easily, many different filesystems (with their pros&cons) are available, same for networking stuff (e.g. Wireguard, nfs with multiple connections since kernel ~5.3, bundle multiple separate TCP/IP connections together, etc...), same for virtualization technologies(Xen, KVM, multiple container flavours), etc... is available to be installed&configured&used quite easily, a lot of stuff can be read/dealt through "/sys" and "/proc" (makes it easy e.g. when reversing-engineering a controller), etc... . It's literally "dreamland" if 1) you wish for something like that (or maybe you aren't even aware that something like that can be done easily on this SW-level) and 2) you're able&willing to invest time in it.
E.g. in my case, on the desktop, I'm super happy with Linux+Gentoo; I guess because I'm a pure techy guy + picky hehe:
I don't have a strong need for any "office" app (Libreoffice is more or less ok for the basic stuff that I need, graphics editing is more or less ok with the available apps), at the same time I want some things (e.g. placement of some windows when I start them, remapping of keyboard keys, ...) to be set up "just as I want them to be" which cannot work with Windows (and I'm excluding OSx by default as being too protective - e.g. bought many years ago an iPod nano 6th gen, could not copy to it files from Linux as the iPod storage was encrypted therefore I threw it away) => yes, Linux & the distro is not easy to handle, but that in turn made me learn a lot of stuff, which in turn made me able to handle a lot of extra stuff (e.g. recently to install ~20 different DBs to do tests & in some cases proof-of-concepts, to understand better networking & tunnels to then work around limitations at work, a lot more stuff...), which in turn made me able to handle as well servers.
On one hand telling a random MacOS/Winows-person to switch to Linux is most probably NOK. Image&video editing & office apps and probably other stuff (doubts about audio apps - I loved Linux+"Jack"+filters when playing guitar as an amateur) are not as good as on those OSs.
On the other hand telling the same to a techy guy/girl >might< be OK. E.g. a huge amount of programming languages can be installed & handled very easily, many different filesystems (with their pros&cons) are available, same for networking stuff (e.g. Wireguard, nfs with multiple connections since kernel ~5.3, bundle multiple separate TCP/IP connections together, etc...), same for virtualization technologies(Xen, KVM, multiple container flavours), etc... is available to be installed&configured&used quite easily, a lot of stuff can be read/dealt through "/sys" and "/proc" (makes it easy e.g. when reversing-engineering a controller), etc... . It's literally "dreamland" if 1) you wish for something like that (or maybe you aren't even aware that something like that can be done easily on this SW-level) and 2) you're able&willing to invest time in it.
E.g. in my case, on the desktop, I'm super happy with Linux+Gentoo; I guess because I'm a pure techy guy + picky hehe:
I don't have a strong need for any "office" app (Libreoffice is more or less ok for the basic stuff that I need, graphics editing is more or less ok with the available apps), at the same time I want some things (e.g. placement of some windows when I start them, remapping of keyboard keys, ...) to be set up "just as I want them to be" which cannot work with Windows (and I'm excluding OSx by default as being too protective - e.g. bought many years ago an iPod nano 6th gen, could not copy to it files from Linux as the iPod storage was encrypted therefore I threw it away) => yes, Linux & the distro is not easy to handle, but that in turn made me learn a lot of stuff, which in turn made me able to handle a lot of extra stuff (e.g. recently to install ~20 different DBs to do tests & in some cases proof-of-concepts, to understand better networking & tunnels to then work around limitations at work, a lot more stuff...), which in turn made me able to handle as well servers.
Except... how do you manage them? With an UI?
I don't know but I've always interacted in terminal, making the fact that I use macOS not significant.
I don't know but I've always interacted in terminal, making the fact that I use macOS not significant.
On the terminal of course, with apps like SecureCRT
This is why WSL is amazing - apt-get is superior to homebrew and macports and the hardware support is unmatched.
Yep. This was it for me. I’m getting a MacBook just so I can run Word and Outlook.
> super unpopular
Only if you’re not in 99.9% of the computer user base.
Only if you’re not in 99.9% of the computer user base.
6) Linux falls over under memory pressure
I've stopped having as much issues with this when I stopped using swap which must be one of the biggest traps for desktop in common linux guides. In my desktop I'd much rather something crash than my system to grind to a halt.
This is true, and I don't understand why Linux doesn't have a smarter approach here. When a process suddenly starts using a lot of memory, and memory usage is approaching the limits of physical RAM, that process should be killed, rather than swapping out things like Gnome to make room for it.
Of course, that assumes a desktop environment. On a server, if a process starts using up a lot of memory, it's probably vitally important to keeping the (database|webserver) up, and should not be constrained in any way.
Which probably explains the situation that we're in.
Of course, that assumes a desktop environment. On a server, if a process starts using up a lot of memory, it's probably vitally important to keeping the (database|webserver) up, and should not be constrained in any way.
Which probably explains the situation that we're in.
systemd-oomd is going to take care of that
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableSystemdOomd
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableSystemdOomd
Actually for me it's the opposite. The linux system grinds to a halt when I don't use swap. See also:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20620545
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/4/15
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20620545
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/4/15
Maybe because nvme is more common now? Last time I had swap was a few years ago now and every time I'd enter it, it'd be so slow as to be hard to even fix it. Since I've had no swap I've had a couple of times when docker or whatever just crashes instead and that's it but possibly with my current nvme swap wouldn't be too awful if it gets used.
Nah, I have a swap partition on an nvme drive, and I still get several minutes of unusability when I run out of RAM and low-to-out of swap, while the kernel takes its sweet time deciding what process to kill. It can get pretty frustrating, and sometimes I just don't feel like waiting and reboot. It doesn't happen often (possibly because I've learned to kill things like IntelliJ when I'm not actively using them), but when it does, it's super annoying.
Yeah it can be due to nvme, because then it's at least somewhat responsive. Ran into an OOM situation with a newer computer of mine that has an NVME and I could close the offending electron application easily.
I want to identify the memory hog(s) first so I can determine the next course of action.
Suddenly seeing a black screen with an Apple while I'm in the middle of something important is irritating at best, especially when it happens repeatedly and I haven't pinned down the RC.
Suddenly seeing a black screen with an Apple while I'm in the middle of something important is irritating at best, especially when it happens repeatedly and I haven't pinned down the RC.
Yeah this seems increasingly more common on Mac lately. It's been happening a lot to me too. And I regularly reimage my systems because I manage a fleet of them. It's not just some weird driver.
For me it was a constant battle with Chromium. On 16GB of RAM it simply wasn't enough. Every other day I was hitting the OOM killer or system freezes.
I was so angry I went and upgraded to 64GB of RAM and now it's stable. I found out that I don't use any more tabs than I have in the past, with gobs of RAM available. So I believe it's just the web getting more bloated over time along with Chrome getting more bloated. One day I suspect I'll be running the same number of tabs and 64GB won't even save me.
I was so angry I went and upgraded to 64GB of RAM and now it's stable. I found out that I don't use any more tabs than I have in the past, with gobs of RAM available. So I believe it's just the web getting more bloated over time along with Chrome getting more bloated. One day I suspect I'll be running the same number of tabs and 64GB won't even save me.
Chrom(e|ium) runs just fine on a Raspberry Pi 4 with 4 GiB, so I think it's the web getting bloated.
The opposite. My issues stopped when I created insane amounts of swap so it never ran out again.
I've rarely actually experienced this (even on HDD based machines). Sometimes the system will chug if a runaway JavaScript somewhere leaks all available memory, but I can usually switch (slowly) to a terminal, kill the offending process, and after a minute or two things will sort themselves out and be fast again. I suspect Ubuntu and them may have pathological kernel VMM and swap settings out of the box.
Lately I've been running with "swappiness" turned way down, but not with completely disabled swap. Eh, I've got 32 GiB of RAM now, my system can handle a few programs in memory -- even a couple of Electron ones.
Lately I've been running with "swappiness" turned way down, but not with completely disabled swap. Eh, I've got 32 GiB of RAM now, my system can handle a few programs in memory -- even a couple of Electron ones.
One of the first things i install is zram.
(edit) if it is not installed by the distro allready (eg dietpi). It creates a swappartition per thread inside ram, unused pages get compressed and stored there. Increases SSD lifetime by reducing writes to swappartition/file on disk.
(edit) if it is not installed by the distro allready (eg dietpi). It creates a swappartition per thread inside ram, unused pages get compressed and stored there. Increases SSD lifetime by reducing writes to swappartition/file on disk.
earlyoom caught on and now distros like Fedora are shipping with it by default.
6) fontconfig
It's way better these days. I'm on Gentoo now and game on it
(1) This is not a problem.
(2) Wrong. Just by you saying "Open Office" means that you are out of touch. You are stuck back in 2010. There is no pathos here. If you have not gotten the memo that Open Office is dead and the project that took over and continued improving is called Libre Office, then it is a sign you are out of touch. Libre Office is not janky, and hundreds of thousands of users beg to differ.
(3) There are several. Thunderbird and Evolution. However you always have your outlook.com for work email.
(4) Wrong. Recently? Define recently. The last 10 years has been a joyride.
(5) Wrong. Krita for photoshop workloads is amazing. Applications are thriving.
(2) Wrong. Just by you saying "Open Office" means that you are out of touch. You are stuck back in 2010. There is no pathos here. If you have not gotten the memo that Open Office is dead and the project that took over and continued improving is called Libre Office, then it is a sign you are out of touch. Libre Office is not janky, and hundreds of thousands of users beg to differ.
(3) There are several. Thunderbird and Evolution. However you always have your outlook.com for work email.
(4) Wrong. Recently? Define recently. The last 10 years has been a joyride.
(5) Wrong. Krita for photoshop workloads is amazing. Applications are thriving.
As someone new to Linux from 20 years on a Mac -- what's the deal with everything being free?
Seriously, where are the "take my money" opportunities. I don't want free OpenOffice. I want to pay $100 for something better, whatever the heck that is, maybe a little less clunky. I don't want free open source Notes app, I want to pay for something that's polished.
The Linux community is incredibly giving and passionate and it seems like it's all "free" but sucks up my time. I couldn't even figure out how to slow the scroll of my trackpad on Ubuntu after lots of digging.
Please, coming as a Mac user, take my money.
Seriously, where are the "take my money" opportunities. I don't want free OpenOffice. I want to pay $100 for something better, whatever the heck that is, maybe a little less clunky. I don't want free open source Notes app, I want to pay for something that's polished.
The Linux community is incredibly giving and passionate and it seems like it's all "free" but sucks up my time. I couldn't even figure out how to slow the scroll of my trackpad on Ubuntu after lots of digging.
Please, coming as a Mac user, take my money.
There are more and more paying/professional-quality software that is available on Linux, mainly due to the popularity of Electron and subscriptions:
- Companies choose Electron to reduce the cost of supporting Windows and Mac, which has the side effect of making Linux supported easily even if the market isn't there. People sure like to complain about Electron but it has been very beneficial for Linux desktops.
- Selling Linux software has always been hard, mainly due to piracy and a widespread aversion to closed-source software within Linux users. With subscription business models being more popular/acceptable nowadays, which comes along a requirement to be always-online, such services are more easily available on Linux too.
For example Linux has VSCode, Spotify, 1password, Bitwarden, Obsidian, Slack, Discord, Skype, Typora, Simplenote, Inkdrop, Wordpress, Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Signal, Atom, Ghost… It has improved drastically from even just 10 years ago, when almost no popular software/service was available.
And that's not mentioning the general shift to using webapps instead of desktop apps (Google Workspace, Office 365, most email services, Jira, Github, Asana…), which obviously makes Linux much more viable.
- Companies choose Electron to reduce the cost of supporting Windows and Mac, which has the side effect of making Linux supported easily even if the market isn't there. People sure like to complain about Electron but it has been very beneficial for Linux desktops.
- Selling Linux software has always been hard, mainly due to piracy and a widespread aversion to closed-source software within Linux users. With subscription business models being more popular/acceptable nowadays, which comes along a requirement to be always-online, such services are more easily available on Linux too.
For example Linux has VSCode, Spotify, 1password, Bitwarden, Obsidian, Slack, Discord, Skype, Typora, Simplenote, Inkdrop, Wordpress, Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Signal, Atom, Ghost… It has improved drastically from even just 10 years ago, when almost no popular software/service was available.
And that's not mentioning the general shift to using webapps instead of desktop apps (Google Workspace, Office 365, most email services, Jira, Github, Asana…), which obviously makes Linux much more viable.
Write once run everywhere has really become a reality with Electron in a practical sense that wasn’t ever quite as real before.
A lot of mudslinging about performance but for a devoted team it’s very possible to build a solid web app.
Love what it’s done for software
A lot of mudslinging about performance but for a devoted team it’s very possible to build a solid web app.
Love what it’s done for software
Would you not consider Java as write once run anywhere? I mean, that was basically its whole selling point.
I feel its popularity is more to do with one stack everywhere, than say, some groundbreaking tech idea.
All that aside, I must agree. Electron, however you view it, has greatly boosted linux compat among popular applications.
I feel its popularity is more to do with one stack everywhere, than say, some groundbreaking tech idea.
All that aside, I must agree. Electron, however you view it, has greatly boosted linux compat among popular applications.
One stack everywhere is not a ground breaking concept since Java did it from an architecture stand point, but Electron is doing it in a new and unique way: one stack across across desktop, web, mobile - device classes instead of just architecture / OS. Same concept applied differently as I see it.
> Would you not consider Java as write once run anywhere? I mean, that was basically its whole selling point.
No, frankly. Java GUI apps on Linux back in the day were often a complete disaster unless it was an open source app with a large Linux dev base. GUI apps had to be written for and tested on all the various platforms they were going to run on. You could probably run simple apps using the oldest lowest common denominator graphics toolkits working without specific support, but those old toolkits were as clunky and ugly as hell.
Electron is far more out of the box on Linux than Java ever was.
No, frankly. Java GUI apps on Linux back in the day were often a complete disaster unless it was an open source app with a large Linux dev base. GUI apps had to be written for and tested on all the various platforms they were going to run on. You could probably run simple apps using the oldest lowest common denominator graphics toolkits working without specific support, but those old toolkits were as clunky and ugly as hell.
Electron is far more out of the box on Linux than Java ever was.
I'm a long time Linux user who got an M1 Macbook Air from work having about the inverse problem. Every little thing costs like $10-50 and it adds up. And the level of polish I've seen isn't really _that_ great. I've paid for things like BetterTouchTool, BetterSnapTool, and Alfred for basic easy features. I still can't get BetterTouchTool to reliably start on boot :/
At this point I've stopped trying to refine my work environment anymore, just because I'm tired of being nickeled and dimed for every little thing
At this point I've stopped trying to refine my work environment anymore, just because I'm tired of being nickeled and dimed for every little thing
What do those window management tools accomplish that Rectangle doesn’t for free? I recently switched to macOS as a daily driver for work and the non-existent window management in macOS is disappointing
Another trick for new macOS users: the solid and excellent free tools are almost invisible.
Most long-term macOS users have a collection that they’ve added to slowly over time as they discovered them on various sites.
Most long-term macOS users have a collection that they’ve added to slowly over time as they discovered them on various sites.
I use Magnet and it's pretty much everything I ever wanted after being on Windows for 13 years.
I’m also long time Linux user and thinking for swapping to Mac on new MBP releases.
Are you telling me that I can’t use same tools anymore than in Linux? I dont really care abot gui tools or gui tweaking. Terminal and browser is enough.
I have lived with the illusion that almost anything with source code is possible to make work. E.g brew even automates this.
The shipped userland is either out of date or uses BSD (not GNU) tools. Install updated GNU tools using brew.
Be forewarned that brew is slow and unreliable compared to apt or dnf. The compiler Apple ships also has weird defaults; you may need to reconfigure your builds.
Alternatively, just build in docker (but beware that docker performance is worse than Linux).
Be forewarned that brew is slow and unreliable compared to apt or dnf. The compiler Apple ships also has weird defaults; you may need to reconfigure your builds.
Alternatively, just build in docker (but beware that docker performance is worse than Linux).
> Install updated GNU tools using brew. Be forewarned that brew is slow and unreliable compared to apt or dnf.
Time to port apt-get to the Mac?
Time to port apt-get to the Mac?
I switched from Linux to an M1 MacBook Air when it came out. I just don't sign into iCloud or use the app store and I have a pretty great experience. The battery life is fantastic and I just install applications from developer's websites.I use FireFox for browser, built in Terminal, Enpass (password manager), Parallels Desktop (VMs), Thunderbird, and Joplin for notes. That's really all I use. So no need for any of the other Apple ecosystem. I do use brew to use stuff like tmux and a few other cli tools.
There's many FOSS alternatives out there, they're just not as easy to find!
[1] I've been a Ubuntu user for 6 years and just got a Mac for work.
[1] I've been a Ubuntu user for 6 years and just got a Mac for work.
Side note, I’ve recently switched to Raycast after seeing them advertise an appkit role on HN and found it be a really great Alfred replacement. Not sure what the future business model is but it’s free right now.
https://www.raycast.com
https://www.raycast.com
I gladly pay for stuff. That means that the developer has motivation to keep the software up to date.
Open source relies on the kindness of strangers, sometimes a project has critical mass (or a corporate sponsor) to keep it alive, others just fizzle out. Then I need to spend time finding a replacement.
For example: this is why I chose Newsblur as my Google Reader replacement, they took my money. And I haven't regretted my choice even once.
Oh and Alfred really doesn't have a replacement anywhere. I bought Soulver just because of the Alfred integration.
Open source relies on the kindness of strangers, sometimes a project has critical mass (or a corporate sponsor) to keep it alive, others just fizzle out. Then I need to spend time finding a replacement.
For example: this is why I chose Newsblur as my Google Reader replacement, they took my money. And I haven't regretted my choice even once.
Oh and Alfred really doesn't have a replacement anywhere. I bought Soulver just because of the Alfred integration.
> That means that the developer has motivation to keep the software up to date.
If you use OSS, anyone can keep the software up to date.
If you use OSS, anyone can keep the software up to date.
Yes, but very few actually will.
It requires someone who is already invested in the software, preferably using it themselves and also has the skills to keep the development going.
It requires someone who is already invested in the software, preferably using it themselves and also has the skills to keep the development going.
Unless the software is fairly niche it’s not uncommon. For example a better maintained fork of youtube-dl made front page just yesterday.
For every youtube-dl there are a dozen that just fade away into obscurity.
The creator no longer cares or uses the software themselves. Maybe they hand off the repo to someone else, who in turn gets crushed under the load and disappears.
The creator no longer cares or uses the software themselves. Maybe they hand off the repo to someone else, who in turn gets crushed under the load and disappears.
I think once the software reaches some critical mass of users it won’t suffer from this problem. So maybe you just use more niche software than me because to me lack of maintainers hasn’t been a problem in practice.
> Oh and Alfred really doesn't have a replacement anywhere.
It has, but it is also macOS only: Launchbar. My personal pain points are also apps like DevonThink and Hammerspoon/Keyboard Maestro.
It has, but it is also macOS only: Launchbar. My personal pain points are also apps like DevonThink and Hammerspoon/Keyboard Maestro.
Instead of BetterSnapTool, just use Rectangle (brew install rectangle).
Re: Alfred, I think it's best in class, and I'm personally happy to pay for it. There's free alternatives (Raycast or w/e it's called), but they're years away in features and usability.
Re: Alfred, I think it's best in class, and I'm personally happy to pay for it. There's free alternatives (Raycast or w/e it's called), but they're years away in features and usability.
Who do you want to take your money?
Someone wrote bash. There's no company behind it. It's mostly just Chet. How do you want to pay Chet? I'm not sure he even accepts donations.
Looking through my bash history to see what I use most often, I think of the OpenSSH devs wrote ssh. Then I think that lots of volunteers wrote Emacs. Oh, oauthtool, I use that often. I should figure out who wrote that. I suppose there's all of the Linux hackers who wrote each part of my kernel. Mercurial as my git. Hey, I wrote parts of that, so at least my debt there feels paid. Ah, there's the Mate developers who forked from Gnome 2 long ago and are now mostly doing basic maintenance on that codebase. Some GNU hackers wrote each of the coreutils but that was long ago and someone else is maintaining them now. Oh, Firefox, of course, the OS-within-an-OS. That also has its own few hundred hackers over the decades that should be paid.
How am I supposed to be paying all of the thousands of people who each wrote a little part of my OS? Apple didn't pay all of the people who wrote the free parts of their OS either. Did you?
There simply is no societal structure in place to pay the people who wrote this stone soup of an OS.
Someone wrote bash. There's no company behind it. It's mostly just Chet. How do you want to pay Chet? I'm not sure he even accepts donations.
Looking through my bash history to see what I use most often, I think of the OpenSSH devs wrote ssh. Then I think that lots of volunteers wrote Emacs. Oh, oauthtool, I use that often. I should figure out who wrote that. I suppose there's all of the Linux hackers who wrote each part of my kernel. Mercurial as my git. Hey, I wrote parts of that, so at least my debt there feels paid. Ah, there's the Mate developers who forked from Gnome 2 long ago and are now mostly doing basic maintenance on that codebase. Some GNU hackers wrote each of the coreutils but that was long ago and someone else is maintaining them now. Oh, Firefox, of course, the OS-within-an-OS. That also has its own few hundred hackers over the decades that should be paid.
How am I supposed to be paying all of the thousands of people who each wrote a little part of my OS? Apple didn't pay all of the people who wrote the free parts of their OS either. Did you?
There simply is no societal structure in place to pay the people who wrote this stone soup of an OS.
Generally speaking the Linux community thinks that money is somewhat evil. There are little "take my money" moment. Most value only comes from services and support, not a common or sustainable stream of revenue on consumer computing.
Which is fundamentally different to the Apple and Mac platform. It is the polish app and "take my money" market. And for most part it is doing exceptionally well. ( On macOS, not MacBook )
Which is fundamentally different to the Apple and Mac platform. It is the polish app and "take my money" market. And for most part it is doing exceptionally well. ( On macOS, not MacBook )
That's could be part of it, at least for some. However, to me, much more important is the open source nature of things, and not so much that it is free. In fact, it consider free and proprietary to be worse than something I'd pay for, since I assume I'd be the product.
Open source means supporting a collective achievement that is shared by humanity.
I use FreeCAD, not because it is better than Fusion 360, and not because one is less expensive, but because the latter is owned by a corporation that exploits knowledge investment (i.e. Free for students, free for everyone to "jk we just wanted you to invest in learning it")
The same goes with most Linux software. The only exception is the operating system itself and gnome, which I find to be miles better than the commercial alternatives. It's so much better, it isn't even a contest. Of course, the caveat is software availability, which to some extent also includes drivers. But that is hardly Linux's fault, although that detail makes little difference to the end user.
Open source also means, to a much larger extent, the absence of dark patterns. Drivers aren't accompanied by telemetry software with a company logo.
Open source means supporting a collective achievement that is shared by humanity.
I use FreeCAD, not because it is better than Fusion 360, and not because one is less expensive, but because the latter is owned by a corporation that exploits knowledge investment (i.e. Free for students, free for everyone to "jk we just wanted you to invest in learning it")
The same goes with most Linux software. The only exception is the operating system itself and gnome, which I find to be miles better than the commercial alternatives. It's so much better, it isn't even a contest. Of course, the caveat is software availability, which to some extent also includes drivers. But that is hardly Linux's fault, although that detail makes little difference to the end user.
Open source also means, to a much larger extent, the absence of dark patterns. Drivers aren't accompanied by telemetry software with a company logo.
Seems like a nice 2x2 matrix here:
Financial cost (free/paid) X Openness (proprietary/open)
Observations:
- Bottom left of the quadrant is Facebook, "you are the product". (free / proprietary)
- Bottom right is Linux, pay with sweat (free / open)
- Top left is traditional software (paid / proprietary)
- Top right is ideal (paid / open)
Observations:
- Bottom left of the quadrant is Facebook, "you are the product". (free / proprietary)
- Bottom right is Linux, pay with sweat (free / open)
- Top left is traditional software (paid / proprietary)
- Top right is ideal (paid / open)
I'd also consider the need for a possible third dimensions, which would be the quality/usability. I do not subscribe to the "pay with sweat". If that would be the case, one could arguably say that you pay for the proprietary alternatives with anti-patterns, forced reboots and update interruptions, and a lot of effort to try and make the operating system not work against you or spy on you.
Of course subjective, but I'd for example place Linux in free, open, and high quality. Similar with blender. Windows would be paid/proprietary but not that good. Etc
Of course subjective, but I'd for example place Linux in free, open, and high quality. Similar with blender. Windows would be paid/proprietary but not that good. Etc
That's helpful context. If there's good pro-Linux developers and apps worth buying from, let me know. i.e. on Mac Panic, Pixelmator, BBEdit. Would love a Mail alternative. Thunderbird is...not for me.
I'll take the opportunity to recommend Standard Notes. They have great Linux support, it's basically an Apple Notes replacement with E2EE for $50/year.
Take my money!
I'll take the opportunity to recommend Standard Notes. They have great Linux support, it's basically an Apple Notes replacement with E2EE for $50/year.
Take my money!
Closest to BBEdit, and worth paying for is SublimeText https://www.sublimetext.com
I’m using mailspring for my email client
A lot of developers pay for their IDE (PHPStorm, for example). And a lot of software accept donations. I don't think people think money is evil, but to accept it, you need to be able to receive it, and that might be too much overhead for a lot of people.
Also, Mac is a much bigger market than Linux on the desktop, and tends to be used by people with money (for the expensive hardware). More of a profession, less of a hobby.
Also, Mac is a much bigger market than Linux on the desktop, and tends to be used by people with money (for the expensive hardware). More of a profession, less of a hobby.
There is paid commercial software for Linux, like MATLAB or Wolfram Mathematica. But the sad truth is that many companies like Microsoft aren't interested in offering MS Office for Linux. A lot of FOSS projects do make money by offering things like 24/7 support and security updates guaranteed for x amount of time (see Ubuntu Extended Security Maintenance). Also a lot of software is used by big companies that do have an interest in sponsoring the development on something they depend on. Where it be by contributing development time themselves or donating money to the developer fund.
Maybe as Wine advances we'll be able to use more and more commercial Windows software, kind of like what is happening with games. But I'm not holding my breath yet.
Maybe as Wine advances we'll be able to use more and more commercial Windows software, kind of like what is happening with games. But I'm not holding my breath yet.
Is there a way to pay for WINE to encourage this? For example Parallels costs $80 on a Mac to run Windows, seems reasonable enough.
Microsoft does offer Teams, Edge, and VS Code on Linux these days.
Is that because all of the above are Electron apps?
Try Elementary OS. They have a sweet pay-what-you-want model, and the UI is really nice. I'm always surprised how many people overlook it, given that it's IMO the only OS I know of with a nice UI that can play games.
https://elementary.io/
https://elementary.io/
If you want, you can run a lot of proprietary Windows software in wine, so this is already an option for you.
However, a lot of open source software projects will also accept donations in addition to code (if you do not have time to contribute the latter) so if you find something lacking there may be an easy way for you to help. I like to pick a few OSS projects every year to make some donations to. I have always figured it would be better to help improve the open source solutions than it is to look for proprietary ones.
However, a lot of open source software projects will also accept donations in addition to code (if you do not have time to contribute the latter) so if you find something lacking there may be an easy way for you to help. I like to pick a few OSS projects every year to make some donations to. I have always figured it would be better to help improve the open source solutions than it is to look for proprietary ones.
Appreciate you sharing your experience how it works. Glad to hear Windows software is an option.
Take a look at Proton, as well. You can use it outside of Steam to run Windows apps.
I hear you, that would be nice to have more premium apps that are paid. I personally would gladly pay for premium apps, even more so if I pay and they are open source.
Until then, here three quality paid apps for Linux:
* Lightworks - professional video editing with GPU support * Bigwig Studio (like Ableton live, creating EDM style music, midi arrangements etc) * Maya - 3D animation software (Pixar uses this too) * IntelliJ/PhpStorm/Pycharm/Rubymine/etc IDEs for coding
Until then, here three quality paid apps for Linux:
* Lightworks - professional video editing with GPU support * Bigwig Studio (like Ableton live, creating EDM style music, midi arrangements etc) * Maya - 3D animation software (Pixar uses this too) * IntelliJ/PhpStorm/Pycharm/Rubymine/etc IDEs for coding
Excuse my correction but it is Bitwig and it is awesome. Funny typo though, the actual leader in that niche (DAW optimized for live playing) would be Ableton Live, and Bitwig was written by former Ableton employees.
There is definitely a proprietary desktop software market for Linux.
For your office example, try WPS office. Never used it myself but I heard good things. There are paid text editors like sublime or the stuff that jetbrains is building. There is also lots of Linux desktop software in the SFX industry.
For your office example, try WPS office. Never used it myself but I heard good things. There are paid text editors like sublime or the stuff that jetbrains is building. There is also lots of Linux desktop software in the SFX industry.
My main problem is I don't want proprietary software. I want to pay for FOSS software. I have a rolling monthly fund where I donate to projects I like. A lot of Linux users scoff at paying for software, but I think the Linux community would really benefit from fostering more of a donation centric culture.
I see contributions which are not paid for as donations. Even if some work is paid for, it's often not market rate for that quality of work.
From this perspective, donations are extremely prevalent, they are just not in terms of money. Of course this doesn't bring food to the table of contributors however. I agree that there should be more monetary donations in FLOSS.
From this perspective, donations are extremely prevalent, they are just not in terms of money. Of course this doesn't bring food to the table of contributors however. I agree that there should be more monetary donations in FLOSS.
Oh Sublime looks great, like BBEdit on Mac. $30 not bad. Thanks for the rec!
Checking WPS out now: https://www.wps.com/premium $30/year, not too bad. The fact that their free version runs on ads is a turnoff from a brand standpoint.
Checking WPS out now: https://www.wps.com/premium $30/year, not too bad. The fact that their free version runs on ads is a turnoff from a brand standpoint.
I love you! You are the exact kind of users we need in the community and I'm ecstatic to see that you're here :-)
I think stuff for you is coming, you're just a little early and a lot of things are in development. That said, Elementary OS was trying to offer the type of thing you're looking for.
It might be time for me to jump back into the desktop app market. I used to make (IMHO) really nice polished Qt apps primarily for Linux but also available for Windows and Mac. I quit doing it because the market collapsed around 2014, but maybe it's time to get back in !!
I think stuff for you is coming, you're just a little early and a lot of things are in development. That said, Elementary OS was trying to offer the type of thing you're looking for.
It might be time for me to jump back into the desktop app market. I used to make (IMHO) really nice polished Qt apps primarily for Linux but also available for Windows and Mac. I quit doing it because the market collapsed around 2014, but maybe it's time to get back in !!
What a warm welcome! Thank you!
There are a few paid apps. Bitwig for music and DaVinci Resolve Studio 17 (there is a free version of DaVinci too), Jetbrains dev tools (intellij,phpstorm, pycharm).
Coming to it, it is a little weird at first. Note that on Mac at least there's the garage band/imovie/ iphoto apps available for free with the OS too.
Your right though, the everything is free and unsupported (usually the take my money moment is for support) . For example I needed to do some minor video editing, what do I use..? There are some major apps that tend to stand out: LibreOffice/Krita/Gimp among others.
I'm using POPos so I tend to find a list of applications and see what's available pre-packaged for my version of linux.
Even Unreal Engine can build on linux with work. Its a bit of a pain, but maybe I'm used to it now..
Coming to it, it is a little weird at first. Note that on Mac at least there's the garage band/imovie/ iphoto apps available for free with the OS too.
Your right though, the everything is free and unsupported (usually the take my money moment is for support) . For example I needed to do some minor video editing, what do I use..? There are some major apps that tend to stand out: LibreOffice/Krita/Gimp among others.
I'm using POPos so I tend to find a list of applications and see what's available pre-packaged for my version of linux.
Even Unreal Engine can build on linux with work. Its a bit of a pain, but maybe I'm used to it now..
I was trying to think of a distribution platform to sell programs on Linux. Steam, kind of?
Seems to be an unfilled niche. Is an opensource app store that sells closed-source software possible or reasonable?
Seems to be an unfilled niche. Is an opensource app store that sells closed-source software possible or reasonable?
That's what Ubuntu has been trying for years with it's store.
Pianoteq is also available for Linux.
That you very much for this. Applied mathematics FTW! and it sounds absolutely gorgeous: https://www.youtube.com/embed/waTykg6Wruw?badge=0&autoplay=0...
(edit) Brian Eno is a huge fan.
(edit) copy'n'paste from their site:
Pianoteq is an award-winning virtual instrument which you can install on your computer (PC/Mac). It is available for Windows, macOS, and Linux, and will even run on some ARM-based boards such as the Raspberry Pi. It can be used both in standalone mode and as an instrument plug-in in VST, AAX, and AudioUnits hosts.
What makes Pianoteq superior to other virtual instruments is that the instruments are physically modelled and thus can simulate the playability and complex behaviour of real acoustic instruments. Because there are no samples, the file size is just a tiny fraction of that required by other virtual instruments, making Pianoteq perfect for any modern laptop.
The secret of Pianoteq
The Pianoteq history is strongly connected to the outstanding career of Philippe Guillaume, who, so to speak, had three lives in one.
In a first life he was a high level expert in piano tuning and piano restoration. He worked with prestigious artists like Maria João Pires and Alicia de la Rocha.
Then at age 30, he started a second life with basic studies in mathematics and succeeded brilliantly in the prestigious French Agrégation competition. He earned in a very short time the title of Doctor in Applied Mathematics degree, then became a full professor, and the Director of the Department of Mathematics of INSA-Toulouse, France.
The adventure of Pianoteq started when Philippe Guillaume tuned his first piano and when he wrote his first mathematical model.
The third life of Philippe Guillaume is devoted to developing and promoting Pianoteq.
With the help of his colleagues and a carefully chosen team of experienced musicians, the complex instrument step by step turned into a vivid and convincing piano simulation which makes it the very first piano of its kind.
(edit) Brian Eno is a huge fan.
(edit) copy'n'paste from their site:
Pianoteq is an award-winning virtual instrument which you can install on your computer (PC/Mac). It is available for Windows, macOS, and Linux, and will even run on some ARM-based boards such as the Raspberry Pi. It can be used both in standalone mode and as an instrument plug-in in VST, AAX, and AudioUnits hosts.
What makes Pianoteq superior to other virtual instruments is that the instruments are physically modelled and thus can simulate the playability and complex behaviour of real acoustic instruments. Because there are no samples, the file size is just a tiny fraction of that required by other virtual instruments, making Pianoteq perfect for any modern laptop.
The secret of Pianoteq
The Pianoteq history is strongly connected to the outstanding career of Philippe Guillaume, who, so to speak, had three lives in one.
In a first life he was a high level expert in piano tuning and piano restoration. He worked with prestigious artists like Maria João Pires and Alicia de la Rocha.
Then at age 30, he started a second life with basic studies in mathematics and succeeded brilliantly in the prestigious French Agrégation competition. He earned in a very short time the title of Doctor in Applied Mathematics degree, then became a full professor, and the Director of the Department of Mathematics of INSA-Toulouse, France.
The adventure of Pianoteq started when Philippe Guillaume tuned his first piano and when he wrote his first mathematical model.
The third life of Philippe Guillaume is devoted to developing and promoting Pianoteq.
With the help of his colleagues and a carefully chosen team of experienced musicians, the complex instrument step by step turned into a vivid and convincing piano simulation which makes it the very first piano of its kind.
Coming from a Mac, and the commercial software world; such as using software like Photoshop or Logic Pro instead of GIMP or Ardour - the polish, standardization and reliability are way, well; worth the damn money.
There is an age-old axiom that 'free isn't free', and Linux quite literally embodies everything about that for me.
When I can get native, commercial software for Linux; without interpreter layers such as WINE, I, along with the majority of the rest of computer users, will consider it. Until then, there are far too many compromises for me to consider it.
I would so much rather pay for a piece of software I rely on - especially every day - and get the support that comes with it to boot - than have it for free. And so do millions of others.
There is an age-old axiom that 'free isn't free', and Linux quite literally embodies everything about that for me.
When I can get native, commercial software for Linux; without interpreter layers such as WINE, I, along with the majority of the rest of computer users, will consider it. Until then, there are far too many compromises for me to consider it.
I would so much rather pay for a piece of software I rely on - especially every day - and get the support that comes with it to boot - than have it for free. And so do millions of others.
> There is an age-old axiom that 'free isn't free', and Linux quite literally embodies everything about that for me.
The entire world runs on Linux and other F/OSS software like Python, Ruby, GCC, Clang, MySQL, Spark, VSCode, etc etc.
The programs you're talking about aren't the only kind of value out there.
> When I can get native, commercial software for Linux; without interpreter layers such as WINE
Valve has integrated their version of Wine (Proton) into Steam with great success. Wine isn't a bad option for the kind of GUI tools that tend not to be popular on Linux.
The entire world runs on Linux and other F/OSS software like Python, Ruby, GCC, Clang, MySQL, Spark, VSCode, etc etc.
The programs you're talking about aren't the only kind of value out there.
> When I can get native, commercial software for Linux; without interpreter layers such as WINE
Valve has integrated their version of Wine (Proton) into Steam with great success. Wine isn't a bad option for the kind of GUI tools that tend not to be popular on Linux.
feels like some important apps are starting to distribute on linux -- tbh steam may be the most important of these because it contains such a diversity of other software and has a microtransaction system
> I don't want free OpenOffice. I want to pay $100 for something better
For me the better thing is also free, it's called markdown.
Agree on trackpad though, someone has probably hacked something together but hardware driver is kind of hard to make as third party.
For me the better thing is also free, it's called markdown.
Agree on trackpad though, someone has probably hacked something together but hardware driver is kind of hard to make as third party.
Markdown is not a replacement for office apps. It's a markup language.
I can't use markdown to open a .docx file for a revision my client sent me.
I can't use markdown to open a .docx file for a revision my client sent me.
I hope eventually markdown would replace docx.
Afterall I think certain official documents are still typed out in plain text.
Afterall I think certain official documents are still typed out in plain text.
It's a chicken and egg problem. Nobody pays for free software, so noone who makes software does the boring things. It sucks up your time because the boring things they don't want to do is that 10% that would make it easier.
Ofcourse there are exceptions, and I am surprised there aren't more companies that go with the ardour model. They give away the source but charge for binaries.
I would even like it if they charge for everything but have it be open source, so you can't download an "official copy" unless you pay.
Ofcourse there are exceptions, and I am surprised there aren't more companies that go with the ardour model. They give away the source but charge for binaries.
I would even like it if they charge for everything but have it be open source, so you can't download an "official copy" unless you pay.
Feel free to use IntelliJ and Jetbrains tools generally like I do and Sublime Text (like I did) and fell free to support a number of the open source packages you like best :-)
I prefer to keep it mostly free as that was how I could afford it back in the days but there's nothing wrong with using pid products you like.
I also try to give back a bit extra now that I can afford it.
I prefer to keep it mostly free as that was how I could afford it back in the days but there's nothing wrong with using pid products you like.
I also try to give back a bit extra now that I can afford it.
A lot of Open Source software products operate on the opposite notion. They won't take your money, you have to give it to them.
I use almost entirely Open Source tools as a game dev for various reasons (some ideological and some practical). All of them get money from me on a monthly basis. It's a security thing; I give them money because I want them to stick around and because there are features that they're working on that I'll need for future projects. Paying them money is much more cost efficient and much safer than trying to build all of my own tools, and much safer and more future-proof than buying into commercial engines.
What I get out of that arrangement is closer relationships with the developers, slightly more input into how software gets built, but mostly just confidence that the products will get better and an increased likelyhood that devs will fix things that are incredibly annoying to me. And some software products (Blender in particular) have shown that this model can work really well if there's enough buy-in from the community. Blender/Krita will even let you sponsor development on specific features if you're willing to pay enough money.
Unfortunately, like with anything else, products suffer if there's not enough funding, and a lot of Open Source products are underfunded. There's an open question in the OS world about how you get people to donate voluntarily rather than forcing them to give money. People don't have the perspective I describe above, it's not an intuitive way to the think about software.
But if you're not in that boat, if you're actually willing to pay money purely to get better software, that's a solveable problem today. Many Open Source products support donations, and at the scale you're talking about (equivalent to Mac, one or two devs make something really good as their job), getting donations to the point where people can work on a project full time would be enough to get the kind of quality boosts you want. Most Open Source projects accepting donations are not at that level yet, but again, if you genuinely want to pay money to increase software quality, you can do that.
But it does require a shift in thinking, you have to break away from the philosophy that the Mac ecosystem has aggressively drilled into you that says you pay for access to things. In Mac, the way you support developers is you pay for access, and as a side effect they build better apps. In Linux, (most of the time) you pay for development, not access. Everyone understands in theory that we pay for software because we want the software to improve. But theory is different than practice, emotionally we buy software because we have to. In Linux with Open Source, if you want software to get better you are forced to internalize the underlying theory -- you have to get your brain to actually believe that you are paying for continued development instead of access to something that already exists. And then at that point, you realize that kicking someone $5-10 a month so that they'll add new scripting APIs to Tiled is actually a really good deal.
Mac's system has the advantage that it forces everyone to participate, so it's easier for Mac developers to get enough money to focus on building really polished products. Mac doesn't require its users to believe that they're paying for development. The weakness of Linux's system is it doesn't force everyone to participate in supporting the ecosystem, so there's way less funding. But while that's a legitimate criticism of Open Source, it's also a purely social/psychological phenomenon. There's no law of nature that means we couldn't collectively pay developers of Open Source apps enough so that they could devote the same amount of time to development as Mac devs do.
And if we did that, then quality would skyrocket, Mac is proof of that. The Mac app ecosystem proves that you don't need giant companies to have great software, all you need are a few developers per-app that can afford to put all of their attention into their apps instead of just their free time.
I use almost entirely Open Source tools as a game dev for various reasons (some ideological and some practical). All of them get money from me on a monthly basis. It's a security thing; I give them money because I want them to stick around and because there are features that they're working on that I'll need for future projects. Paying them money is much more cost efficient and much safer than trying to build all of my own tools, and much safer and more future-proof than buying into commercial engines.
What I get out of that arrangement is closer relationships with the developers, slightly more input into how software gets built, but mostly just confidence that the products will get better and an increased likelyhood that devs will fix things that are incredibly annoying to me. And some software products (Blender in particular) have shown that this model can work really well if there's enough buy-in from the community. Blender/Krita will even let you sponsor development on specific features if you're willing to pay enough money.
Unfortunately, like with anything else, products suffer if there's not enough funding, and a lot of Open Source products are underfunded. There's an open question in the OS world about how you get people to donate voluntarily rather than forcing them to give money. People don't have the perspective I describe above, it's not an intuitive way to the think about software.
But if you're not in that boat, if you're actually willing to pay money purely to get better software, that's a solveable problem today. Many Open Source products support donations, and at the scale you're talking about (equivalent to Mac, one or two devs make something really good as their job), getting donations to the point where people can work on a project full time would be enough to get the kind of quality boosts you want. Most Open Source projects accepting donations are not at that level yet, but again, if you genuinely want to pay money to increase software quality, you can do that.
But it does require a shift in thinking, you have to break away from the philosophy that the Mac ecosystem has aggressively drilled into you that says you pay for access to things. In Mac, the way you support developers is you pay for access, and as a side effect they build better apps. In Linux, (most of the time) you pay for development, not access. Everyone understands in theory that we pay for software because we want the software to improve. But theory is different than practice, emotionally we buy software because we have to. In Linux with Open Source, if you want software to get better you are forced to internalize the underlying theory -- you have to get your brain to actually believe that you are paying for continued development instead of access to something that already exists. And then at that point, you realize that kicking someone $5-10 a month so that they'll add new scripting APIs to Tiled is actually a really good deal.
Mac's system has the advantage that it forces everyone to participate, so it's easier for Mac developers to get enough money to focus on building really polished products. Mac doesn't require its users to believe that they're paying for development. The weakness of Linux's system is it doesn't force everyone to participate in supporting the ecosystem, so there's way less funding. But while that's a legitimate criticism of Open Source, it's also a purely social/psychological phenomenon. There's no law of nature that means we couldn't collectively pay developers of Open Source apps enough so that they could devote the same amount of time to development as Mac devs do.
And if we did that, then quality would skyrocket, Mac is proof of that. The Mac app ecosystem proves that you don't need giant companies to have great software, all you need are a few developers per-app that can afford to put all of their attention into their apps instead of just their free time.
That's a really interesting way of thinking about it. I'm so far not willing to switch away from the Mac because of the app ecosystem, and it's largely because of small, Mac-only applications with just one or two developers. (I also really do like the macOS UX, even if Big Sur gives me more nits to pick, but I'm sure I could adjust to something else.)
The big issue, I guess, is that social/psychological phenomenon you're referring to. I've noticed on HN that when discussions come up about how creators -- artists, fiction writers, journalists, filmmakers, etc. -- are or should be compensated for their work, there is a very loud contingent that invariably pops up arguing, in effect, that creators shouldn't expect any compensation at all. "Nobody is owed a living," and "if they really want to create, they'll do it for free." I can't help but suspect that is also a pretty big stumbling block for funding the creation of free software: everyone philosophically appreciates the free as in speech aspect, but an awful lot of free software consumers seem to be pretty in love with the free as in beer aspect, too.
The big issue, I guess, is that social/psychological phenomenon you're referring to. I've noticed on HN that when discussions come up about how creators -- artists, fiction writers, journalists, filmmakers, etc. -- are or should be compensated for their work, there is a very loud contingent that invariably pops up arguing, in effect, that creators shouldn't expect any compensation at all. "Nobody is owed a living," and "if they really want to create, they'll do it for free." I can't help but suspect that is also a pretty big stumbling block for funding the creation of free software: everyone philosophically appreciates the free as in speech aspect, but an awful lot of free software consumers seem to be pretty in love with the free as in beer aspect, too.
> but an awful lot of free software consumers seem to be pretty in love with the free as in beer aspect, too.
I do think it's legitimately a shift in thinking, I think that people are not accustomed to actually thinking about why they're paying money -- both in Open Source and with proprietary apps.
It's in some ways to Open Source's credit that it rejects the notion that the only way to fund software is through artificial scarcity of the finished product. There is some debate in Open Source communities about whether rejecting that kind of funding is ultimately a sustainable strategy. And I won't weigh in on that other than to really make it clear that what I'm talking about is not embracing that we need more paywalls in Open Source.
I get my Open Source software free as in speech, but I also get it free as in beer. I am not paying for the software, the software is free. I'm at the point with a lot of this stuff where I won't pay the software, it feels weird to do so. What I am paying for is someone to continue developing the software, I'm paying for someone to devote a few extra minutes towards making the things I am heavily reliant on better. And I'm paying that monthly because at the start of each month, I still want however many minutes of development time my money can buy.
I am not paying for Krita, I am paying for a dedicated team of developers who have thought way more than me about the architecture and UX of Krita, to make Krita's animation system support motion tweening.
When you internalize what you're paying for, it becomes a lot less about "paying what you owe" or "not being a leech" (although of course there are also moral/social aspects to donations as well). It's just realizing that it wouldn't take much money to greatly increase the amount of development time these projects get, and for many of these projects, that increased development time could permanently solve some tangible problems in my life, and I want that.
The current Patreon page for Tiled is a good example of this: https://www.patreon.com/bjorn
I use Tiled for 100% of my current mapmaking, even for commercial products that I'm developing. Tiled is free (as in speech and beer), I don't pay for it. But... 222 people donating collectively $2,000 a month mean this developer now has an office where he works on Tiled for 2 days a week. And as a result, I'm observing that Tiled is getting more development and releasing new features that I care about.
Tiled already does a lot of stuff that I care about, and I would like it to be what I use for mapmaking indefinitely. Forget morals or responsibility or anything, 222 people donating around $10 a month is enough to ensure that something exists that would never otherwise exist at the same level of quality and with the same software freedoms, and that it's good enough that I can realistically use it on commercial products. That is a bargain, and it didn't take much collective action to make it happen, and it could get even better in the future. There are problems in the Linux ecosystem that we could permanently solve by even just temporarily as a community dumping money onto the developers working on them, and it wouldn't be that expensive to do.
I do think it's legitimately a shift in thinking, I think that people are not accustomed to actually thinking about why they're paying money -- both in Open Source and with proprietary apps.
It's in some ways to Open Source's credit that it rejects the notion that the only way to fund software is through artificial scarcity of the finished product. There is some debate in Open Source communities about whether rejecting that kind of funding is ultimately a sustainable strategy. And I won't weigh in on that other than to really make it clear that what I'm talking about is not embracing that we need more paywalls in Open Source.
I get my Open Source software free as in speech, but I also get it free as in beer. I am not paying for the software, the software is free. I'm at the point with a lot of this stuff where I won't pay the software, it feels weird to do so. What I am paying for is someone to continue developing the software, I'm paying for someone to devote a few extra minutes towards making the things I am heavily reliant on better. And I'm paying that monthly because at the start of each month, I still want however many minutes of development time my money can buy.
I am not paying for Krita, I am paying for a dedicated team of developers who have thought way more than me about the architecture and UX of Krita, to make Krita's animation system support motion tweening.
When you internalize what you're paying for, it becomes a lot less about "paying what you owe" or "not being a leech" (although of course there are also moral/social aspects to donations as well). It's just realizing that it wouldn't take much money to greatly increase the amount of development time these projects get, and for many of these projects, that increased development time could permanently solve some tangible problems in my life, and I want that.
The current Patreon page for Tiled is a good example of this: https://www.patreon.com/bjorn
I use Tiled for 100% of my current mapmaking, even for commercial products that I'm developing. Tiled is free (as in speech and beer), I don't pay for it. But... 222 people donating collectively $2,000 a month mean this developer now has an office where he works on Tiled for 2 days a week. And as a result, I'm observing that Tiled is getting more development and releasing new features that I care about.
Tiled already does a lot of stuff that I care about, and I would like it to be what I use for mapmaking indefinitely. Forget morals or responsibility or anything, 222 people donating around $10 a month is enough to ensure that something exists that would never otherwise exist at the same level of quality and with the same software freedoms, and that it's good enough that I can realistically use it on commercial products. That is a bargain, and it didn't take much collective action to make it happen, and it could get even better in the future. There are problems in the Linux ecosystem that we could permanently solve by even just temporarily as a community dumping money onto the developers working on them, and it wouldn't be that expensive to do.
> it's all "free" but sucks up my time.
Linux is for users who don’t value their time.
Linux is for users who don’t value their time.
That's a terrible take. I enjoy having control over my computer and software. There's not some PM somewhere pushing a crappy change to forward their career.
This is definitely not true generally! I value my time high as well and I have been using Linux for many years. System updates are no worse than any other system, I would even say easier as I don't need to reboot every time. I have been using VSCode, Libreoffice, GIMP, VLC, Firefox, KiCAD, MPV, VLC and many other apps (mostly CLI) - mostly backend development, docker, databases, webapps - and I had wonderful experience doing so. I can imagine it may be more difficult for graphic designers and a like but I can imagine that even in that category some people are using only basic features doable in SW like GIMP and yet are still paying a lot for subscription-based proprietary software unnecessarily.
I've been using Linux exclusively for 10 years now and I value my time more than anything. I save a ton of time by being on an environment where I can finely tune my setup for my desired workflow and automate absolutely everything.
[deleted]
I don't use Linux b/c it's the best desktop. I use it for two fundamental reasons:
1. With enough time and effort I can make it do whatever I want it to do (that can be done).
2. I'm a Python web developer and we deploy to Linux so it means I only really need to learn one OS (time to learn is in limited supply for me as man who cares about family life).
What this means practically for me is that 95% of what the OS provides works the way I want it to. I have a handful of things I customize and I've scripted those (Linux is great for scripting) so it's easy to apply when I refresh my OS every 1-2 years.
It also means I don't have to do things the Apple way, I can make it work the way I want it to work (within reason).
It also means I don't have an OS that will put advertisements in the start menu (that was the last straw for my family using Windows, everyone uses Linux now).
I realize if I was a lawyer and needed Microsoft Office or a designer and needed the Adobe Suite, then I couldn't take this approach or would need to run a different OS in a VM. I wish the Linux desktop would be an attractive target for all popular commercial apps to support it. But I'm not holding my breath, that's not why I use it.
1. With enough time and effort I can make it do whatever I want it to do (that can be done).
2. I'm a Python web developer and we deploy to Linux so it means I only really need to learn one OS (time to learn is in limited supply for me as man who cares about family life).
What this means practically for me is that 95% of what the OS provides works the way I want it to. I have a handful of things I customize and I've scripted those (Linux is great for scripting) so it's easy to apply when I refresh my OS every 1-2 years.
It also means I don't have to do things the Apple way, I can make it work the way I want it to work (within reason).
It also means I don't have an OS that will put advertisements in the start menu (that was the last straw for my family using Windows, everyone uses Linux now).
I realize if I was a lawyer and needed Microsoft Office or a designer and needed the Adobe Suite, then I couldn't take this approach or would need to run a different OS in a VM. I wish the Linux desktop would be an attractive target for all popular commercial apps to support it. But I'm not holding my breath, that's not why I use it.
> 1. With enough time and effort I can make it do whatever I want it to do (that can be done).
I did this when I was younger. Now I have more money than time, so I'm prepared to pay to spend less time making stuff do what I want it to do.
> It also means I don't have to do things the Apple way, I can make it work the way I want it to work (within reason).
I used to fine-tune my system with the weirdest shit, every corner of the screen did a different thing, all 3 buttons did different things to windows depending on where you clicked.
Now I just use macOS pretty much vanilla out of the box. If I use Linux, I just use the defaults.
Copying over settings to multiple computers is just way too much bike-shedding for me.
I did this when I was younger. Now I have more money than time, so I'm prepared to pay to spend less time making stuff do what I want it to do.
> It also means I don't have to do things the Apple way, I can make it work the way I want it to work (within reason).
I used to fine-tune my system with the weirdest shit, every corner of the screen did a different thing, all 3 buttons did different things to windows depending on where you clicked.
Now I just use macOS pretty much vanilla out of the box. If I use Linux, I just use the defaults.
Copying over settings to multiple computers is just way too much bike-shedding for me.
Regarding copying over settings between macOS and Linux, powerusers usually maintain their own dotfiles and it's not a problem to make it somewhat OS-agnostic, so you can set up a similar environment within minutes.
Yes, you can set up an environment in minutes with an OS-agnostic dotfiles repo.
BUT first you need to spend a good year bikeshedding said repo and picking a sync tool and a versioning strategy and testing it and and. =)
I've been there already.
BUT first you need to spend a good year bikeshedding said repo and picking a sync tool and a versioning strategy and testing it and and. =)
I've been there already.
You keep using the word bike-shedding incorrectly. Did you just learn this word and are really excited to use it everywhere?
"Bikeshedding, also known as Parkinson's law of triviality, describes our tendency to devote a disproportionate amount of our time to menial and trivial matters while leaving important matters unattended."
ie. spending way too much time configuring your working environment vs actually working.
ie. spending way too much time configuring your working environment vs actually working.
As someone who's been locked into the Apple ecosystem since 2010, I was extremely hopeful that this article would help me.
Unfortunately, the writer does not use iOS devices, iCloud, FaceTime, unlikely to be using iMessage (although not explicitly stated), so this is great if you're hooked in macOS only, and not with iDevices & iCloud services as well.
Unfortunately, the writer does not use iOS devices, iCloud, FaceTime, unlikely to be using iMessage (although not explicitly stated), so this is great if you're hooked in macOS only, and not with iDevices & iCloud services as well.
I don't understand entirely. Apple has locked you into their walled garden.
But FaceTime and iMessage? There are plenty of alternatives. More importantly the alternatives have bigger user bases. What is making you feel locked into iMessage?
Interoperability between apple devices and services is good, but any individual service is not actually great. They are only good if you commit everything to apple.
So if you actually wanted to break free, switching from iMessage and FaceTime would be the easiest. Reduce your dependencies of stuff in the walled garden, then leaving that garden get easier.
Apple knows that switching from MacOS/iOS is hard if you use their services that only work on their devices. The solution is don't use their services even if you use their devices.
But FaceTime and iMessage? There are plenty of alternatives. More importantly the alternatives have bigger user bases. What is making you feel locked into iMessage?
Interoperability between apple devices and services is good, but any individual service is not actually great. They are only good if you commit everything to apple.
So if you actually wanted to break free, switching from iMessage and FaceTime would be the easiest. Reduce your dependencies of stuff in the walled garden, then leaving that garden get easier.
Apple knows that switching from MacOS/iOS is hard if you use their services that only work on their devices. The solution is don't use their services even if you use their devices.
> What is making you feel locked into iMessage?
When the not-tech savvy grandmother uses iMessage and FaceTime, it's hard to encourage her to switch to What'sApp or Discord.
When the not-tech savvy grandmother uses iMessage and FaceTime, it's hard to encourage her to switch to What'sApp or Discord.
How did your not-tech savvy grandparent deal with grandkids who use don't use apple products?
If an entire family feels compelled to use apple products because the family users apple products things start feeling more like a religion then a technical choice for a product.
The fact that the software choices of other people are forcing your hardware choices here is horrible.
If an entire family feels compelled to use apple products because the family users apple products things start feeling more like a religion then a technical choice for a product.
The fact that the software choices of other people are forcing your hardware choices here is horrible.
So you expect people who don't really even care about technology in the first place to rapidly adapt to your changing preferences? I don't have facebook, and I know that I could be better in touch with my extended family and many of my friends if I had one, it's my choice to die on that hill. I don't want facebook to invade my privacy, I could make a hardware choice and have a device or devices dedicated solely to their swill, to cordon off my private life from their information vacuum, but I choose not to do so.
How is switching off of one ecosystem (facebook ads monetization) any different than another (Apple hardware monetization).
I think the difference is that you can use other solutions on multiple of platforms.
Whatsapp/facebook is definitely a market leader in the chat world, but they can be disrupted. You can use theirs or other products on your iPhone, Android, PC, Mac, or Linux.
With the hardware vendor, iMessage isn't used because it's necessarily better but because it is a forced automatic sign up when you use their phone.
iMessage IS the sms application. And you cannot install alternative SMS apps. You are quite literally forced to use it if you want to communicate with people with other phones.
Apple does not care about iMessage as a platform. They only care that it is difficult to leave it.
It's why switching to another device causes problems for most. People who were communicating with you over iMessage will still send their messages there. If you have to very manually and very unintuitively de-enroll your number from iMessage.
For the non-technical this makes it appear that other devices do not work at all. They are trapped in the apple ecosystem even if they don't like it.
Whatsapp/facebook is definitely a market leader in the chat world, but they can be disrupted. You can use theirs or other products on your iPhone, Android, PC, Mac, or Linux.
With the hardware vendor, iMessage isn't used because it's necessarily better but because it is a forced automatic sign up when you use their phone.
iMessage IS the sms application. And you cannot install alternative SMS apps. You are quite literally forced to use it if you want to communicate with people with other phones.
Apple does not care about iMessage as a platform. They only care that it is difficult to leave it.
It's why switching to another device causes problems for most. People who were communicating with you over iMessage will still send their messages there. If you have to very manually and very unintuitively de-enroll your number from iMessage.
For the non-technical this makes it appear that other devices do not work at all. They are trapped in the apple ecosystem even if they don't like it.
>With the hardware vendor, iMessage isn't used because it's necessarily better but because it is a forced automatic sign up when you use their phone.
Agree to disagree I guess. It is "forced automatic sign up" to use GooglePlayServices when you use android. Using microG is significantly more complicated than unenrolling from iMessage, and you can go to Settings>Messages>iMessage to switch it to just plain SMS, if thats really your prerogative(I've done this when traveling overseas).
To me iMessage is unequivocally better because I'm not the product the way I am on most(all?) trivial to use free services(spinning up a Matrix/IRC/etc server is not trivial). I pay for hardware that has an ability, in this case to use iMessage and Facetime, and in return I'm given some level of assurance that my actions on those platforms aren't going to be monetized through advertisement and leaking of PII. Being able to receive high quality photos from my family through an easy to use interface when I'm not at home without some surveillance corp knowing my location is a good deal to me. My Apple devices last a long time and require minimal upkeep.
>Apple does not care about iMessage as a platform. They only care that it is difficult to leave it. I agree, they could offer iMessage on Android for a monthly/yearly fee like they do Apple Music. I would heavily support this and I'm sure they would lose some market share. To play devils advocate, I'm not savvy to the calculus on developing such an app and API scheme to prevent users from using an alternate client, and they would have no control over, say, an android keyboard keylogging/screen reading their user's messages, I guess they could implement their own secure Apple keyboard for the App, I think password managers do this? But this is starting to seem like a pretty significant engineering burden, that would probably make the service unrealistically expensive. idk. Security is part of the implicit marketing of iMessage, it's pay to use not use to be used. That said, I have no doubt that the driving reason for not opening up iMessage is because it keeps people, especially in the US, locked in to iPhones. Trying to keep customers locked in is pretty standard business practice though. So you can hang your hat on me and others with a similar point of view being okay with abusive business practices if you like.
That said, I do think that
> you have to very manually and very unintuitively de-enroll your number from iMessage.
Is scummy. No bones about it, if you wipe your iPhone it should ask you right then and there if you want to unenroll your number from iMessage, and they should monitor delivery and email you if they suspect that you no longer have an iPhone asking if you want to unenroll from iMessage delivery(e.g. you broke your iPhone and replaced it with another product). Writing the email would be very difficult though, many naive users would probably be alarmed that Apple can tell if they receive messages. But it should be easy not hard, the current experience is terrible indeed.
And while I'm at it, you should be able to have a first class Apple experience without an iPhone. Specifically I should be able to pair my Apple Watch with an iPad or iPod.
Agree to disagree I guess. It is "forced automatic sign up" to use GooglePlayServices when you use android. Using microG is significantly more complicated than unenrolling from iMessage, and you can go to Settings>Messages>iMessage to switch it to just plain SMS, if thats really your prerogative(I've done this when traveling overseas).
To me iMessage is unequivocally better because I'm not the product the way I am on most(all?) trivial to use free services(spinning up a Matrix/IRC/etc server is not trivial). I pay for hardware that has an ability, in this case to use iMessage and Facetime, and in return I'm given some level of assurance that my actions on those platforms aren't going to be monetized through advertisement and leaking of PII. Being able to receive high quality photos from my family through an easy to use interface when I'm not at home without some surveillance corp knowing my location is a good deal to me. My Apple devices last a long time and require minimal upkeep.
>Apple does not care about iMessage as a platform. They only care that it is difficult to leave it. I agree, they could offer iMessage on Android for a monthly/yearly fee like they do Apple Music. I would heavily support this and I'm sure they would lose some market share. To play devils advocate, I'm not savvy to the calculus on developing such an app and API scheme to prevent users from using an alternate client, and they would have no control over, say, an android keyboard keylogging/screen reading their user's messages, I guess they could implement their own secure Apple keyboard for the App, I think password managers do this? But this is starting to seem like a pretty significant engineering burden, that would probably make the service unrealistically expensive. idk. Security is part of the implicit marketing of iMessage, it's pay to use not use to be used. That said, I have no doubt that the driving reason for not opening up iMessage is because it keeps people, especially in the US, locked in to iPhones. Trying to keep customers locked in is pretty standard business practice though. So you can hang your hat on me and others with a similar point of view being okay with abusive business practices if you like.
That said, I do think that
> you have to very manually and very unintuitively de-enroll your number from iMessage.
Is scummy. No bones about it, if you wipe your iPhone it should ask you right then and there if you want to unenroll your number from iMessage, and they should monitor delivery and email you if they suspect that you no longer have an iPhone asking if you want to unenroll from iMessage delivery(e.g. you broke your iPhone and replaced it with another product). Writing the email would be very difficult though, many naive users would probably be alarmed that Apple can tell if they receive messages. But it should be easy not hard, the current experience is terrible indeed.
And while I'm at it, you should be able to have a first class Apple experience without an iPhone. Specifically I should be able to pair my Apple Watch with an iPad or iPod.
It's not so different form everyone in a friend group buying an XBox so they can all play (game) together, honestly.
So if you have friends who play on PS and friends who play on XBox, is it reasonable to choose one set over the other? Should I buy the same game twice?
Just because unreasonable walls exist else where does not justify unreasonable walls everywhere.
Just because unreasonable walls exist else where does not justify unreasonable walls everywhere.
I agree, and in my opinion it's Apple's greatest sin. (Linux/Android/Pinephone/Matrix user here with family in the Apple ecosystem)
Discord I agree, but it should be easy to install and use Whatsapp. There are probably already millions of grandmas using it since Whatsapp is the dominant messaging app outside the US (even by iOS users).
BTW Whatsapp also has audio and video calls.
BTW Whatsapp also has audio and video calls.
I feel like arguing that Facebook is somehow a better plan than iMessage is a little weird.
I wasn't arguing which is better, just that it would be easy to switch to.
Also, what should 90% of the world population that can't afford an iPhone do?
Also, what should 90% of the world population that can't afford an iPhone do?
Find something that Facebook doesn't own? I mean, there ARE other options, right?
That are as easy and ubiquitous so that a grandmother can easily install and use?
...here we are back at iMessage. Weird!
Whatsapp isn't really Facebook and it is ubiquitious. I live in Europe and have lived in Africa, I only know of one person that doesn't have it and they're tinfoil hat level paranoid (following a privacy scare earlier this year).
Whatsapp really is Facebook. Facebook owns them, lock stock and barrel, so I'm not sure what you think the distinction is.
I understand it's ubiquitous, but I don't personally use it, and can't imagine joining it. Nobody I know uses it, but I will absolutely allow as how that probably has to do with demographics -- my network of friends, family, and coworkers is overwhelmingly on iOS.
I understand it's ubiquitous, but I don't personally use it, and can't imagine joining it. Nobody I know uses it, but I will absolutely allow as how that probably has to do with demographics -- my network of friends, family, and coworkers is overwhelmingly on iOS.
Why would you set up grandma with apps that invade her privacy. She's the most impressionable person and will use it if given. I got my family and grandparents switched to Signal as the furthest compromise between usability and privacy I'd be willing to go
Agreed, Signal has been great. My wife's family is using it. No complaints.
Just keep an iPad around for that.
I use Linux but that happily keep an iPad for certain things (mail, calendar, video meetings etc).
I use Linux but that happily keep an iPad for certain things (mail, calendar, video meetings etc).
Wouldn't they just switch to sms and zoom?
Why use mac though? iPhone also works.
FaceTime will soon work with web links, tho I dunno if you can schedule that from the non-Apple side.
> What is making you feel locked into iMessage?
It’s hard because you have a whole family and/or friends on iMessage, and you need to get everyone to switch. That can be tricky. It’s doable, but it’s definitely harder than, e.g, copying your photos somewhere else. I can do that by myself, but I need to get everyone else on board to switch away from iMessage.
It’s hard because you have a whole family and/or friends on iMessage, and you need to get everyone to switch. That can be tricky. It’s doable, but it’s definitely harder than, e.g, copying your photos somewhere else. I can do that by myself, but I need to get everyone else on board to switch away from iMessage.
But none of those users will talk to me :(
iMessage is a little weird.
I use other apps too, but somehow straight up SMS messages from non iPhone users seem to get routed to iMessage on my phone. The messages also seem to get forwarded to a computer if your logged in.
I use other apps too, but somehow straight up SMS messages from non iPhone users seem to get routed to iMessage on my phone. The messages also seem to get forwarded to a computer if your logged in.
iMessage is the SMS app as well, so that makes sense. Forwarding of SMS and phone calls to your Mac is part of continuity. https://www.apple.com/macos/continuity/
I've been using Linux as my primary desktop since the early 90's. I used to dual boot as needed, then switched to Windows in a VM, but now I will RDP into a Windows server at work if I need to run a business app. But for the most part everything I do is either a web app or is in a terminal window. Of course that is a function of my particular career (Unix/Linux systems/network engineer/developer).
At home I use VLC for videos, or Chrome/Firefox for Netflix (and other streaming services). I also picked up a Chromebook tablet for various media consumption needs. I can't really think of the last time I needed a non-Linux system for anything.
At home I use VLC for videos, or Chrome/Firefox for Netflix (and other streaming services). I also picked up a Chromebook tablet for various media consumption needs. I can't really think of the last time I needed a non-Linux system for anything.
I needed a non-linux system recently to update the firmware on a Digidesign Mbox... had to borrow someone's mac.
> iOS devices, iCloud, FaceTime, unlikely to be using iMessage
Attack it piece by piece.
I have some experience de-siloing myself, and I have some insight on this. The first and most important thing is that you should (for the most part) not use anything that's a free hosted cloud service.
Find a cross platform equivalent to those services and start switching to them. Standards based hosted services are much easier to set up than self-hosting, and makes it MUCH easier to switch out later.
The first thing I'd recommend you do is get Signal installed. Figure out which of your friends are on there already, and just start sending them messages from that.
Next, register a domain. Your name is a good start, since you'll need it for email (and for, if the privacy landscape in the US continues on its trajectory, self-hosting)
Here are some good (non exhaustive) cross-platform alternatives that I use or have used:
- icloud photos: Google Drive, Smugmug (my fav), Flickr
- icloud mail/contacts/calendars: Fastmail (mail + card/caldav syncing)
- imessage/facetime: signal (im aware there's other chat clients but signal is me and my friends' go to. Discord, whatsapp, telegram, etc also exist)
- safari: Firefox with account set up
I pay less than $150 a year, and I get phone or email support with a real person for all of the services I use. I use an iphone, apple watch, with windows 10 on a laptop, and desktop linux. It all works together pretty well, and it really wasn't that hard to establish.
Attack it piece by piece.
I have some experience de-siloing myself, and I have some insight on this. The first and most important thing is that you should (for the most part) not use anything that's a free hosted cloud service.
Find a cross platform equivalent to those services and start switching to them. Standards based hosted services are much easier to set up than self-hosting, and makes it MUCH easier to switch out later.
The first thing I'd recommend you do is get Signal installed. Figure out which of your friends are on there already, and just start sending them messages from that.
Next, register a domain. Your name is a good start, since you'll need it for email (and for, if the privacy landscape in the US continues on its trajectory, self-hosting)
Here are some good (non exhaustive) cross-platform alternatives that I use or have used:
- icloud photos: Google Drive, Smugmug (my fav), Flickr
- icloud mail/contacts/calendars: Fastmail (mail + card/caldav syncing)
- imessage/facetime: signal (im aware there's other chat clients but signal is me and my friends' go to. Discord, whatsapp, telegram, etc also exist)
- safari: Firefox with account set up
I pay less than $150 a year, and I get phone or email support with a real person for all of the services I use. I use an iphone, apple watch, with windows 10 on a laptop, and desktop linux. It all works together pretty well, and it really wasn't that hard to establish.
The hard one is continuity’s copy paste. I can copy & paste images and text seamlessly between my laptop and phone. I can’t think of a way to set that up myself any other way - maybe a custom app with a content box?
It’s insanely useful, and such a drag when I don’t have it. (Eg when working from my Linux workstation)
It’s insanely useful, and such a drag when I don’t have it. (Eg when working from my Linux workstation)
KDE Connect provides clipboard continuity between desktop and mobile, among many other features:
https://kdeconnect.kde.org/
The GNOME client is GSConnect: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1319/gsconnect/
https://kdeconnect.kde.org/
The GNOME client is GSConnect: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1319/gsconnect/
Does that work between Linux and Mac? Linux and phone?
Yes and yes (unless you are using iOS). KDE Connect can sync the clipboard between any combination of desktop and mobile devices on Android, Linux, macOS, and Windows. The macOS version is still in development, but there is a compatible port called Soduto that works perfectly on macOS:
https://soduto.com
https://soduto.com
https://prism-break.org/ offers a better list of alternatives. Moving from one proprietary service to another should be seen as a lateral move. If switching, may as well choose at least some options that don't spy on you.
The biggest one for me isn't anything you mention, It is iCloud Keychain. Due to all the security concern I have finally made the effort to use random password for almost everything now ( macOS even has a hidden password generator in KeyChain App if one of those site happen to have stupid password combination requirement )
But I cant even use it in Firefox on my Mac.
But I cant even use it in Firefox on my Mac.
Can't you migrate everything to a cross platform password manager like KeepassXC or Bitwarden? It seems quite clunky that the iCloud Keychain locks you to a particular browser and operating system platform.
I use a Linux exclusively for my regular computing needs, development work, office stuff etc., and have an iPhone and iPad. The iPhone market is so much larger than the Mac market that Apple has designed the devices to work just fine without a Mac to plug in to.
I do use Dropbox instead of iCloud for most files, but if I need to get a photo out of iCloud, the web interface works fine.
Huh? I use iOS devices and do not own a single macOS device. iPhone + iPad + Windows desktop. It’s great.
I haven’t connected my iPhone to a PC is 6 years. iTunes is the worst piece of software ever made. Thankfully it hasn’t been needed or even useful for half a decade.
I haven’t connected my iPhone to a PC is 6 years. iTunes is the worst piece of software ever made. Thankfully it hasn’t been needed or even useful for half a decade.
I think there's a huge amount of value in bringing more of the Linux and UNIX experience to the Mac. That way I can still use my iPhone and I can still us Logic and Pages, but I can run a window manager that I can modify and customize. That's just one aspect. It would be nice to have some other *nix features like procfs/sysfs, BSD jails (or at least better chroot support), tmpfs, etc.
I’m in a similar situation. Once the core apps stop working as expected — iMessage, FaceTime, easy transfer of music to iPhone — I will be going back to Linux. I honestly can’t wait, but for now it’s not worth the time sink to get it installed on this 2010 MBP. Plus that would be an immediate loss of functionality for most of those applications without considerable research into FOSS alternatives.
If you feel that trapped doesn't it piss you off?
Do what I did and switch to Signal wholesale. Or at least to Telegram. Both have really nice desktop clients on Linux. Move to Brave Search as well - it has its own index and it's easily on par with Google in my experience.
I still have a few people on Messages, but they contact me through my iPhone, so I'm not losing anything. It baffles me why anyone on this site would use services that are not available across all major platofrms.
I still have a few people on Messages, but they contact me through my iPhone, so I'm not losing anything. It baffles me why anyone on this site would use services that are not available across all major platofrms.
It's important not to start using a service which will be difficult to cease using. This is how lock in occurs. It's not truly convenient if you're stuck with it.
That works great if you're a nerd and only every communicate with other nerds. Once you try to talk to moms, your stuck using FB or messages. So, you can be definitely use the most secure stuff out there that gives you all the freedom to do exactly what you want, but you'll be on that island all by yourself. Enjoy
my mum is too much of a normie to use computers regularly at all, which helps
she either calls or messages, which from the lock-in standpoint is just better and perfectly adequate - it means much less spurious messaging
she either calls or messages, which from the lock-in standpoint is just better and perfectly adequate - it means much less spurious messaging
The service known as the Internet taught me this.
like the internet?
> It's not truly convenient if you're stuck with it.
That's a bit extreme. I would say that it's only inconvenient if you need/want to switch - everyone can make a guess about the probability that they will want to switch in the future, what effort it would take and whether that's worth it for the value they will get in the meantime.
That's a bit extreme. I would say that it's only inconvenient if you need/want to switch - everyone can make a guess about the probability that they will want to switch in the future, what effort it would take and whether that's worth it for the value they will get in the meantime.
But that's a trade-off that most users are expected to have. I like how macOS can handle continuity of applications (iMessage, Apps, Fileshare) across multiple devices. I haven't seen any other OSs or ecosystem handle this as well as Apple's.
I switched from apple to Linux fora brief 6 month period, but sheepishly came crawling back to OSX when I got my M1 MacBook Air.
Using Linux was pretty awesome but there were a bunch of niggles that made it irritating, especially around battery life. No matter how many things I tried, power top and all the other battery tricks, it just wasn't that good.
The other was getting hardware accelerated video to work in Firefox, although I think Firefox finally supports it nowadays with recent versions.
Using Linux was pretty awesome but there were a bunch of niggles that made it irritating, especially around battery life. No matter how many things I tried, power top and all the other battery tricks, it just wasn't that good.
The other was getting hardware accelerated video to work in Firefox, although I think Firefox finally supports it nowadays with recent versions.
My System76 Lemur Pro easily runs a complete business day on a single battery charge, on Pop_OS!.
Thanks to its hardware, performance can be throttled (which I barely notice as it’s quite performing with standard settings) so that a single charge can last easily 12 hours.
A complete business day of battery life is "table stakes" now with premium laptops.
- The M1 Macbook Pro get 20 hours of battery.
- The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 gets 20 hours of battery.
- The Dell XPS 13 gets 19 hours of battery
Those are probably the most popular laptop models in use today in the category of premium laptops, which is the category of computer I think the majority of people reading this comment will be using.
Cheaper laptops will not be as good as that, but evenmost of $600-800 laptops will get 8-10 hours of battery life.
- The M1 Macbook Pro get 20 hours of battery.
- The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 gets 20 hours of battery.
- The Dell XPS 13 gets 19 hours of battery
Those are probably the most popular laptop models in use today in the category of premium laptops, which is the category of computer I think the majority of people reading this comment will be using.
Cheaper laptops will not be as good as that, but evenmost of $600-800 laptops will get 8-10 hours of battery life.
I'll add an LG Gram 17 to that list.
19-20 hours of battery, and a nice 16:10 screen. Also, super light.
Everything on default Fedora just works out of the box.
19-20 hours of battery, and a nice 16:10 screen. Also, super light.
Everything on default Fedora just works out of the box.
Uhh yeah my i9 MBP can last a 'complete business day' full of long Zoom calls and active churning Electron apps too. That is a pretty low bar imo
I did the same thing. I was a Mac user, then Apple went through that period of time where there were no good laptops. I eventually bought a Lenovo and used it with Linux. Honestly my daily experience was fine most of the time, but you have to constantly worry about battery life to get the most out of it.
I switched back to a Mac with an M1 Mac and the battery lasts for days. I almost never use it plugged in now. I can go many days with normal use, not even compromising to conserve battery. On linux you need to use PowerTop and tweak it to the performance/endurance ratio you want. You are constantly thinking about it. The new M1 Mac doesn't require those compromises or even the need to think about it.
Also i'll add that you can TOTALLY get by on Linux. Linux users are quick to offer solutions like:
- "run that windows program in WINE"
- "there's a Gnome extension that does that"
- "I found a binary on github that will do what you want"
- "all you have to do is make a script and it'll do the same thing"
- "use [FOSS Program] instead of [Evil Corporate Program I really want], it works basically the same"
- "the native version of that program doesn't exist on Linux, but you can use the web version which is basically the same"
But when I switched back to Mac I remembered how I didn't have to make compromises anymore. I could have the programs I wanted, without the weird open source versions that weren't quite as good. Programs just installed, I didn't need to compile them or get the right installers or anything like that. You don't get weird incompatibilities of certain programs and your WM. You didn't worry about battery life or drivers anymore. I didn't need to use web versions. Yes I had to re-purchase some license keys for many apps but this doesn't bother me. I don't mind paying for software that improves my quality of life.
This isn't to shit on Linux. I actually use Linux all day long for work, just ironically I am SSH'd in via my Mac. Linux makes a great server. Its also a Good desktop. But Mac makes a better desktop. Call me a fanboy or a sellout. But I the experience isn't as polished as Mac and in many ways not even as "polished" as Windows (and that was hard for me to type out). Also don't tell me I am too stupid for Linux or didn't give it a chance or didn't learn it enough to enjoy it. I have a RHCA and LPIC-2 certifications. I work in Linux via the terminal 8 hours a day. I know how linux works, but as a graphical system I really would rather have Mac.
However to be fair, I run Red Hat Enterprise Linux on my work computer and that is the closest Linux distro to the Windows/Mac world that you will find. Virtually everything works out of the box and is reliable. It is worth the license fee IMO. You still compromise on app selection, but it does solve many of the annoyances around drivers and compatibility that other distros suffer with. It is far harder to customize, but if you just want something that you can install and start using like you would with Windows, then RHEL is the solution.
I switched back to a Mac with an M1 Mac and the battery lasts for days. I almost never use it plugged in now. I can go many days with normal use, not even compromising to conserve battery. On linux you need to use PowerTop and tweak it to the performance/endurance ratio you want. You are constantly thinking about it. The new M1 Mac doesn't require those compromises or even the need to think about it.
Also i'll add that you can TOTALLY get by on Linux. Linux users are quick to offer solutions like:
- "run that windows program in WINE"
- "there's a Gnome extension that does that"
- "I found a binary on github that will do what you want"
- "all you have to do is make a script and it'll do the same thing"
- "use [FOSS Program] instead of [Evil Corporate Program I really want], it works basically the same"
- "the native version of that program doesn't exist on Linux, but you can use the web version which is basically the same"
But when I switched back to Mac I remembered how I didn't have to make compromises anymore. I could have the programs I wanted, without the weird open source versions that weren't quite as good. Programs just installed, I didn't need to compile them or get the right installers or anything like that. You don't get weird incompatibilities of certain programs and your WM. You didn't worry about battery life or drivers anymore. I didn't need to use web versions. Yes I had to re-purchase some license keys for many apps but this doesn't bother me. I don't mind paying for software that improves my quality of life.
This isn't to shit on Linux. I actually use Linux all day long for work, just ironically I am SSH'd in via my Mac. Linux makes a great server. Its also a Good desktop. But Mac makes a better desktop. Call me a fanboy or a sellout. But I the experience isn't as polished as Mac and in many ways not even as "polished" as Windows (and that was hard for me to type out). Also don't tell me I am too stupid for Linux or didn't give it a chance or didn't learn it enough to enjoy it. I have a RHCA and LPIC-2 certifications. I work in Linux via the terminal 8 hours a day. I know how linux works, but as a graphical system I really would rather have Mac.
However to be fair, I run Red Hat Enterprise Linux on my work computer and that is the closest Linux distro to the Windows/Mac world that you will find. Virtually everything works out of the box and is reliable. It is worth the license fee IMO. You still compromise on app selection, but it does solve many of the annoyances around drivers and compatibility that other distros suffer with. It is far harder to customize, but if you just want something that you can install and start using like you would with Windows, then RHEL is the solution.
I have a similar story. I built a Linux workstation running Mint when apple’s laptops were bad. I love / hate it. The machine (amd x5800) is insanely fast and responsive compared to the laptop it’s replacing. But so many niggles:
- I use an apple trackpad and everything is weird with it. Sensitivity is all wrong and I still get spurious taps and clicks. FF doesn’t have smooth scrolling working by default. Intellij doesn’t support it at all. Driver is buggy too - sometimes after waking from sleep I have to power cycle my keyboard / trackpad for them to work.
- There don’t seem to be any consistency around keyboard shortcuts. Ctrl+C sometimes copies and sometimes sends SIGINT. What’s the shortcut for “move cursor forward one word” or “move cursor to end of line”? On macos those shortcuts are consistent in every app. On Linux? Nope! I can’t even configure intellij to use the shortcuts I’m used to because it doesn’t let you use the meta key as a modifier.
- Hibernate and sleep is buggy. Sometimes the machine just doesn’t come back up.
- I sometimes have a duplicate mouse cursor, just hovering over all my windows for no reason. I can’t get rid of it. Apparently it has something to do with hidpi but who knows what.
And so on. There’s so many little interactions where something is half broken and I roll my eyes and move on with my life. For all its flaws, I didn’t realise how good macos is until I switched to Linux. Linux is definitely better than it was - all my hardware more or less worked out of the box. But I’m still keeping an eye on apple’s rumoured M1X laptops.
- I use an apple trackpad and everything is weird with it. Sensitivity is all wrong and I still get spurious taps and clicks. FF doesn’t have smooth scrolling working by default. Intellij doesn’t support it at all. Driver is buggy too - sometimes after waking from sleep I have to power cycle my keyboard / trackpad for them to work.
- There don’t seem to be any consistency around keyboard shortcuts. Ctrl+C sometimes copies and sometimes sends SIGINT. What’s the shortcut for “move cursor forward one word” or “move cursor to end of line”? On macos those shortcuts are consistent in every app. On Linux? Nope! I can’t even configure intellij to use the shortcuts I’m used to because it doesn’t let you use the meta key as a modifier.
- Hibernate and sleep is buggy. Sometimes the machine just doesn’t come back up.
- I sometimes have a duplicate mouse cursor, just hovering over all my windows for no reason. I can’t get rid of it. Apparently it has something to do with hidpi but who knows what.
And so on. There’s so many little interactions where something is half broken and I roll my eyes and move on with my life. For all its flaws, I didn’t realise how good macos is until I switched to Linux. Linux is definitely better than it was - all my hardware more or less worked out of the box. But I’m still keeping an eye on apple’s rumoured M1X laptops.
Check out Elementary. I won't suggest switching distros entirely, but maybe you can get your hands on the trackpad parts?
I just switched and both the Dell trackpad and Magic Trackpad worked flawlessly at a macOS quality level. Superior to Windows, but really macOS (and now Elementary) is the quality bar.
I just switched and both the Dell trackpad and Magic Trackpad worked flawlessly at a macOS quality level. Superior to Windows, but really macOS (and now Elementary) is the quality bar.
Just to clarify, are you saying that there is a Linux distro out there which you can install on a 2019+ model MBP which will not ruin the touchpad with multitouch and battery experience?
As someone who has used Linux almost exclusively on the desktop for the past 10 years, I recently bought a Windows laptop to use with Piano Marvel. I was astonished at just how awful the Windows experience was. From the mandatory online user accounts, to the pre-installed garbage. Not to mention the in-your-face-constantly notifications, and forced updates. Using Linux feels unshackled and more polished.
I would agree wholeheartedly with the former, but definitely not the latter. I keep going back to Windows because I'm sick of constantly dealing with all the little headaches that crop up whenever I use a Linux Desktop.
Which little headaches? Sounds like you are using hardware designed not for Linux if you have hardware problems.
It is not just hardware problems. Hardware problems I can be understanding about because there are millions of devices out there and I can't reasonably expect all of them to be supported.
No, there are plenty of software problems too. In a recent media PC build I couldn't get sound to work if a browser was launched from Kodi, even after several hours of faffing about with pulse. It wasn't hardware, the sound worked fine in Kodi.
I frequently find myself in scenarios where I want to install software that is not in the repo (every distro has this problem). If there is no PPA or AppImage I will either have to hack up some other distro's package to make an appfolder version or build it from source myself in a VM. That's pretty annoying for something that's trivial in other OSs.
OBS can't seem to remember the various video capture sources between reboots. To be fair to Linux there might be a viable way for it to do so[0], but it isn't using it.
And a ton of other little things I've forgotten because they're so common to my experience of using Linux I don't bother to remember them.
Elsewhere in this thread you can read that other people have the same death-by-a-thousand-cuts thing going on, it's very common.
[0] I imagine using udev supplied device names or something instead of just what's under /dev/video.
No, there are plenty of software problems too. In a recent media PC build I couldn't get sound to work if a browser was launched from Kodi, even after several hours of faffing about with pulse. It wasn't hardware, the sound worked fine in Kodi.
I frequently find myself in scenarios where I want to install software that is not in the repo (every distro has this problem). If there is no PPA or AppImage I will either have to hack up some other distro's package to make an appfolder version or build it from source myself in a VM. That's pretty annoying for something that's trivial in other OSs.
OBS can't seem to remember the various video capture sources between reboots. To be fair to Linux there might be a viable way for it to do so[0], but it isn't using it.
And a ton of other little things I've forgotten because they're so common to my experience of using Linux I don't bother to remember them.
Elsewhere in this thread you can read that other people have the same death-by-a-thousand-cuts thing going on, it's very common.
[0] I imagine using udev supplied device names or something instead of just what's under /dev/video.
[deleted]
This was published on March 21, 2020 which is well before the introduction of the M1 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro on November 17, 2020.
I think this is important. I switched to macOS and stopped using my desktop completely because the M1 chip in my MacBook Air is so powerful it beats it by a long shot. It runs literally everything I do so smoothly and without emitting a single sound since there's no fan (and no coil whine under load for those who know what that is on the Intel MacBooks.) Unbelievably, it just doesn't get hot. I'm averaging temps under 30C without a monitor and under 35C with a 4k external monitor attached. Only brief bursts above that when compiling or doing something more intensive, but you don't even feel it. I do everything on this laptop. All my professional work, simultaneous Chrome profiles, dozens and dozens of tabs, video calls through Meet/Zoom, programming, VSCode, Photoshop, watching 4k videos, terminal, everything. It doesn't even stutter, and has NO FAN.
I've been really happy with my M1 and it's my first Macbook ever, I've been a diehard Windows guy my entire life. So, so, so tired of loud and failing fans on my Windows machines, terrible trackpads, terrible displays, constant hardware issues, Windows update forcing shutdowns in the middle of meetings, malware-level upgrade prompts, etc etc.
It was a love hate relationship with me. I had an intel MacBook Pro and hated it for a couple of years. So went and got a Ryzen based T495 thinkpad. This was pretty good but I got seduced by the M1 so jumped in.
I had three major issues with the M1. Firstly not enough RAM and it’s crazy expensive. Secondly I couldn’t run local x86-64 VMs which are if you like it or not the defacto cloud standard. Thirdly a lot of third party stuff just doesn’t work at all. The last point was the killer. I had a massive problem trying to get something Qt based working properly and eventually gave up. Oh and the thing feels physically horrible - give me a plastic laptop with rounded edges any day.
Then the whole CSAM thing.
So fuck Apple. Out came the T495 again and it’s sitting here with 24Gb of RAM and a 1TiB SSD that I put in myself and didn’t have to pay in organs.
In fact as a pricing point the T495 cost me £550 new old stock with 20 months of next business day premier warranty left. +16Gb of RAM was £77. +1TiB £109.
I had three major issues with the M1. Firstly not enough RAM and it’s crazy expensive. Secondly I couldn’t run local x86-64 VMs which are if you like it or not the defacto cloud standard. Thirdly a lot of third party stuff just doesn’t work at all. The last point was the killer. I had a massive problem trying to get something Qt based working properly and eventually gave up. Oh and the thing feels physically horrible - give me a plastic laptop with rounded edges any day.
Then the whole CSAM thing.
So fuck Apple. Out came the T495 again and it’s sitting here with 24Gb of RAM and a 1TiB SSD that I put in myself and didn’t have to pay in organs.
In fact as a pricing point the T495 cost me £550 new old stock with 20 months of next business day premier warranty left. +16Gb of RAM was £77. +1TiB £109.
I don't actually think macOS is any less buggy than windows, as someone who uses both constantly. And wsl2 is decent if shockingly hard to set up properly. But damn, having my macbook not relocate all my windows when disconnecting from a monitor is such a godsend.
> But damn, having my macbook not relocate all my windows when disconnecting from a monitor is such a godsend.
and it puts them all back where they were when you plug it back in. it's so nice!
and it puts them all back where they were when you plug it back in. it's so nice!
That has not been my experience with my Mac. Seems like once or twice a week the arrangement is off or the task bar is in the wrong spot.
I'm not sure I've encountered a single bug in the half year or more I've had this. I don't ask a lot of it, to be fair. I guess Firefox as my main browser really drains the hell out of the battery, which is annoying. Not really a bug.
That is amazing. My work machine is on Big Sur and the minor glitches are pretty constant. Having bluetooth connected can cause weird issues, the dock and top bar frequently forget where they are supposed to be, and quite a few other similarly minor issues.
Yeah, in my experience macOS work really well if you just stick to the same few applications over time. I guess my problem is that I'm always installing new stuff, tinkering with settings, and tweaking things everywhere I go. I don't think I've ever gone more than a year or two without having to completely wipe my mac and start over from scratch because of bugs.
I probably tweak more settings than most on macOS and I've not encountered any of the common bugs people experience.
Reviews on tech boards about macOS are similar to reviews for apartment buildings: why would anybody bother writing a good one? Complaints and issues bubble to the top.
Reviews on tech boards about macOS are similar to reviews for apartment buildings: why would anybody bother writing a good one? Complaints and issues bubble to the top.
One other big problem I've had with bugs and issues in macOS is that every time I look online for solutions, I consistently find people entirely dismissing those problems as rare or "you're using it wrong" instead of acknowledging that problems exist and/or offering potential solutions.
It's extremely frustrating when you're just trying to work and your OS gets in the way _and_ everyone online just says, "Well, it works for me!"
It's extremely frustrating when you're just trying to work and your OS gets in the way _and_ everyone online just says, "Well, it works for me!"
I was quite impressed when I ssh-ed into the M1 machine offered by the GCC Compile Farm, and found that it recompiles the TXR Lisp standard library in under 3 seconds.
I just ssh into my desktop if I need more grunt. That’s a lot faster than an M1.
Sure, a many-many-core desktop will be able to beat the M1 when the workload extensively uses parallel processing. But there likely isn't any faster single-thread CPU in the world at the moment[0], barring any overclocking. If there is (maybe through other benchmarks), then the difference will be minor and the competing CPU would be extremely power hungry in comparison.
Remember the M1 is a 10W chip.
[0] https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
Remember the M1 is a 10W chip.
[0] https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
16GB max ram is a non starter for any real work.
It really depends on what you’re working on. It seems fine for most of what I do. (Intellij / vscode and a compiler). I have 32 gigs because it’s cheap but I could get away with 8 gigs if I wanted to. I probably wouldn’t even notice.
You’re probably right for synthetic benchmarks.
But none of my workloads work on macOS. So the point is moot.
I did have an M1 MBA and mini until recently for reference.
But none of my workloads work on macOS. So the point is moot.
I did have an M1 MBA and mini until recently for reference.
does M1 run linux just a well?
It's still under heavy development (see https://asahilinux.org for more details). Developer Alyssa Rosenzweig has been doing great work on getting Linux graphics to work on the M1; just a few days ago she announced that she got GNOME to work on the M1, though without graphics acceleration (https://twitter.com/alyssarzg/status/1429579145827127296). It's still going to be a while until Linux on the M1 reaches daily-driver status.
As far as I know there has been progress made to add native linux support for the M1 (the work done by the people at Asahi Linux comes to mind) but there's still a long way to go. However virtualization isn't too bad, I've been using UTM and their prebuilt images and that's worked for most of my needs so far.
No, and it probably won't unless Apple releases GPU documentation or a kernel blob (neither of which are very likely)
I don’t think the Linux port to M1 is complete yet
Is this the 8GB version?
And, notably, before Apple's announcement that they will incorporate some of their child safety features in macOS Monterey. No NeuralHash/CSAM scanning just yet though https://www.apple.com/child-safety/
Additionally the M1 Mac Mini is a remarkably nice little machine. Not perfect, but fits the"I just need a basic desktop machine" niche very nicely.
Personal experience and opinion: Ex Apple user (20+ years), changed lot of roles, nowadays I manage, design and implement front-end stuff. My last Linux Desktop tinkering was at the time when Suse Desktop was the power behind creation of compiz (don't remember exactly) and was a nightmare.
I am familiar with Ubuntu/Debian as servers, never intended to use Linux Desktop seriously.
So as I sad numerous time here I switched my company to Arch/Manjaro on Apple Hardware, some of the engineers are with KDE, some with Gnome and I don't here any complains whatsoever. We are adapted all the work to Linux Desktops in record time, but this is not the important point that I want to share.
The important point is in the semantics of the following words related to computing: User Control. Transparency. Security. Peace of mind.
Apple progressively lost me with all Unification of the platforms and ignoring professionals constantly. Recent "scanning fiasco" cured my fetishism completely.
I am running Manjaro with Gnome and find that with minimal technical effort I have unique UX (Gnome Layout Switcher with tiling option) which makes me more productive than macOS. I never expected so painless transition, honestly.
On a commercial software: I will pay double or triple the price for Affinity Designer port to Linux. I have asked in the past and they answered No, but we will see in the future.
I am familiar with Ubuntu/Debian as servers, never intended to use Linux Desktop seriously.
So as I sad numerous time here I switched my company to Arch/Manjaro on Apple Hardware, some of the engineers are with KDE, some with Gnome and I don't here any complains whatsoever. We are adapted all the work to Linux Desktops in record time, but this is not the important point that I want to share.
The important point is in the semantics of the following words related to computing: User Control. Transparency. Security. Peace of mind.
Apple progressively lost me with all Unification of the platforms and ignoring professionals constantly. Recent "scanning fiasco" cured my fetishism completely.
I am running Manjaro with Gnome and find that with minimal technical effort I have unique UX (Gnome Layout Switcher with tiling option) which makes me more productive than macOS. I never expected so painless transition, honestly.
On a commercial software: I will pay double or triple the price for Affinity Designer port to Linux. I have asked in the past and they answered No, but we will see in the future.
Desktop OS (Mac, Linux, Windows) needs an authoritarian single person designer that can dictate how UI/UX would work. Democratically developed interfaces suffer from the same paralysis that industrial design faces - You need Ettore Sottsass, Dieter Rams and Jony Ive of software UX/UI. Otherwise it’s an unfocused trend driven graphical gore that community tends to develop. A thousand squeaky wheels can’t stay aligned on the road.
I think they’re all broken. Not just Linux Desktop.
I think they’re all broken. Not just Linux Desktop.
GNOME is the closest thing to that in an open source world, they build on top of one pretty specific vision and have a good set HIGs.
And if you don't like it, you're wrong. Not because your opinion is not valid, but because that's what you're requesting essentially.
And if you don't like it, you're wrong. Not because your opinion is not valid, but because that's what you're requesting essentially.
> I think they’re all broken. Not just Linux Desktop.
Agreed. At this point it is just a matter of which brand of brokenness you tolerate best.
Agreed. At this point it is just a matter of which brand of brokenness you tolerate best.
Back in the 90s, I think the Apple UI design team (whatever it was called) provided the best such dictated UI guidelines I've seen.
Just to make the point that it doesn't have to be one person.
Just to make the point that it doesn't have to be one person.
Agree but it needs to behave like an authoritarian little group - lots of autonomy and decision making abilities.
A lot of car designs are done by a single person aided by a small group of exceptional designers. That brings me to a second point - that team has to be the cream of the crop. Not any goof with design degree but a demonstrated long history of exceptional understanding of human to machine interaction. Apple attracted such people back in the day.
A lot of car designs are done by a single person aided by a small group of exceptional designers. That brings me to a second point - that team has to be the cream of the crop. Not any goof with design degree but a demonstrated long history of exceptional understanding of human to machine interaction. Apple attracted such people back in the day.
It's still not the same though. There was a lead designer, who was accountable to the CTO, who was accountable to the shareholders. There's downward pressure to stop analysis paralysis when it appears.
It doesn’t matter which distro you use… unless it’s NixOS. Declarative operating systems are the future. NixOS is incredible. My whole configuration is a git repo. My servers have the exact same neovim/tmux/zsh config as my laptop. Switching between desktop environments couldn’t be easier. Messed up your system? Simply choose a previous generation on the boot screen. Seriously, try NixOS.
caveat: gargantuan learning curve. Expect to be learning a small yet slightly odd programming language and an ecosystem years in the making. As a distro it is strictly only useful for very technically minded people or people who rely on someone like that to maintain their distro for them.
But once you do learn it and fully prepared your set-up, it's amazing. Around a month ago I switched from Arch to NixOS after using the former for around a decade and I'm very happy with it despite its warts.
But once you do learn it and fully prepared your set-up, it's amazing. Around a month ago I switched from Arch to NixOS after using the former for around a decade and I'm very happy with it despite its warts.
I agree that there is a large learning curve. It certainly took me a many months to get a good configuration repo going. But I see this as a failure of documentation rather than a failure of NixOS. The way I have my config setup is really not complicated, but it took so long to figure out the design. I really want to write a blog post series about how I do NixOS because I highly value simplicity and I think there are too many NixOS “learning” resources that are written by and for highly technical NixOS gurus. NixPills is a prime example of this. That blog post series is NOT for beginners. At all. But somehow is referenced as a learning resource.
Is your config on GitHub or are you on Twitter or something? I'd love to see what you came up with. I'd like to try NixOS but I don't have the time/motivation to learn something too complicated
My config isn’t open-source just because it’s pretty personal information. You would be able to see every database in my local Postgres instance for example. And every one of my servers. But I do plan on making a open-source version as an example soon. And some blog posts. On twitter I’m https://twitter.com/stelstuff. The blog posts will be on https://stel.codes. GitHub I’m https://github.com/stelcodes
I've also switched from Arch (has been on it for ~10 years) to NixOS (~1 year so far), and fully agree it's amazing.
I've been thinking how interesting it would be to create a user-friendly Linux distribution on top of standard NixOS (similar to what Manjaro is to Arch), which would not require learning Nix language or tinkering with the configs. I mean, system configuration/choosing packages/drivers/kernels should not really require a user to write in Nix language - the sane choices can mostly be represented by a set of GUI checkboxes. There also could be GUI utilities for other Nix goodness, such as creating nix-shells with necessary dependencies available, declaring wrappers for proprietary software, or building temporary VMs. So, I would say, the user absolutely does not need to know a lot about Nix to fully appreciate robustness of NixOS way, and in principle, with the right tools/GUIs it can be very approachable for even non-technical users - it's just that user friendliness seemingly has not been a priority so far.
I've been thinking how interesting it would be to create a user-friendly Linux distribution on top of standard NixOS (similar to what Manjaro is to Arch), which would not require learning Nix language or tinkering with the configs. I mean, system configuration/choosing packages/drivers/kernels should not really require a user to write in Nix language - the sane choices can mostly be represented by a set of GUI checkboxes. There also could be GUI utilities for other Nix goodness, such as creating nix-shells with necessary dependencies available, declaring wrappers for proprietary software, or building temporary VMs. So, I would say, the user absolutely does not need to know a lot about Nix to fully appreciate robustness of NixOS way, and in principle, with the right tools/GUIs it can be very approachable for even non-technical users - it's just that user friendliness seemingly has not been a priority so far.
Ive thought about this too! That seems totally possible. I think that’s such a great idea. It could truly bring Linux to the masses!
> Declarative operating systems are the future.
Is there a version of this future where I don't have to learn a new language just to effectively use a computer?
Is there a version of this future where I don't have to learn a new language just to effectively use a computer?
Doesn’t every declarative tool require some new learned syntax? The Nix language is pretty damn good at configuration IMO. It is significantly less complex than python, for example.
If that is true, then I definitely don't want a declarative operating system to be my future. I'd rather have things designed simply and understandably than overcomplicate them in this way.
I used NixOS for years now and it would be my first choice for anything else, but I wouldn't use it for desktop.
Solus has that on lock for me and initially I didn't see it as particularly special, I too thought distros didn't matter much anymore. I thought I could switch away from it to any number of capable distros, but it never worked out and I returned to Solus every time.
Solus has that on lock for me and initially I didn't see it as particularly special, I too thought distros didn't matter much anymore. I thought I could switch away from it to any number of capable distros, but it never worked out and I returned to Solus every time.
I joke with a friend -- a serious emacs maven of 20+ years -- that he took up NixOS only because he was no longer daunted by emacs.
NixOS looks neat, but holy hell I absolutely do not have the time to deal with the learning curve OR the implicit abandonment of all the tools I use to do my job.
NixOS looks neat, but holy hell I absolutely do not have the time to deal with the learning curve OR the implicit abandonment of all the tools I use to do my job.
Lol emacs is honestly too complex for me to dive into. I like vim because it’s simpler! I seriously value simplicity. And wanting to stay on whatever works for you, that’s totally fair. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. The beauty of NixOS is that makes all the package management and configuration completely declarative and versioned. And includes a huge amount of options that abstract away complex Linux tooling, making things “just work” for 99% of use cases.
Can you bootstrap a NixOS installation via WiFi? I've been using Nix as a package manager, but I avoid distros like Arch that are (or at least were) a pain to install if you don't have an ethernet connection to bootstrap from.
I've installed NixOS over wifi a few times, most recently for a desktop that wasn't next to my router and that I didn't feel like relocating to connect via ethernet. The fully featured install ISO (not the minimal version) comes with a GNOME desktop environment and you can point-and-click to set up your wifi for the install.
However, a fun trick I learned recently is to tether your phone to your computer while installing any Linux distro. My phone's tether connection over USB just looks like ethernet (as far as I can tell), so there is less fiddling around. My Android phone can tether to my wifi as well, so no need to use your cellular data.
However, a fun trick I learned recently is to tether your phone to your computer while installing any Linux distro. My phone's tether connection over USB just looks like ethernet (as far as I can tell), so there is less fiddling around. My Android phone can tether to my wifi as well, so no need to use your cellular data.
So NixOS is great for using the same setup between computers. What about for people with one computer? Is it still good? Is it as easy as Ubuntu?
Yes definitely good for one computer! And I really think that NixOS is simpler than Ubuntu but there are many different ways of setting up your configuration repo and that is difficult for beginners. The way I do NixOS is very simple. And I really want to make a comprehensive guide on how to do it my way because it’s so nice! But I had to wrestle with it for many months to get to where I’m at with my config repo.
Is it equivalent to initialize Git repository in $HOME ?
No. It replaces the FHS with a whole new vision of how the OS is arranged and managed.
I wholeheartedly agree, and I am a giant NixOS fan, BUT:
1. You need space for the Nix store, so it's not appropriate for every system (I like building small embedded appliances).
2. A six month release cycle can get a bit tiresome after a while. I know it's personal preference, but I wish it was a bit longer.
3. Or, in order to contribute to the project, you need to chase the dragon with the unstable channel.
4. Forcing all the system state through the funnel of a single config file is great, except that it doesn't cover home directories. I found that I ended up with a massive unmanaged blob of state in my home directory which I couldn't capture (I never tried out home-manager, maybe I should have).
This is not to detract from NixOS! NixOS is great, and I remain a massive fan :-). But on my personal systems I find myself using macOS and Debian these days. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
EDIT: Line spacing
1. You need space for the Nix store, so it's not appropriate for every system (I like building small embedded appliances).
2. A six month release cycle can get a bit tiresome after a while. I know it's personal preference, but I wish it was a bit longer.
3. Or, in order to contribute to the project, you need to chase the dragon with the unstable channel.
4. Forcing all the system state through the funnel of a single config file is great, except that it doesn't cover home directories. I found that I ended up with a massive unmanaged blob of state in my home directory which I couldn't capture (I never tried out home-manager, maybe I should have).
This is not to detract from NixOS! NixOS is great, and I remain a massive fan :-). But on my personal systems I find myself using macOS and Debian these days. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
EDIT: Line spacing
Valid points. I definitely wouldn’t use NixOS on embedded. About contributing, You don’t really need to be on the unstable channel completely. I use a mix of stable and unstable packages. It’s not hard to do but it’s also not super intuitive either. And about home directories, I don’t use Home Manager either. I find that it introduced too much complexity and I don’t actually like it all that much. What I do is globally install all my packages and put configuration files in /etc. if the programs don’t have an /etc location to look for, I just create a symlink to config file in my home directory. That way all my config files are in my nixos-config repo.
I want to write a blog post about my way of setting up NixOS. There are many ways to go about it and I feel like mine prioritizes simplicity and doesn’t use complex Nix techniques, so it may be very helpful for beginners.
I want to write a blog post about my way of setting up NixOS. There are many ways to go about it and I feel like mine prioritizes simplicity and doesn’t use complex Nix techniques, so it may be very helpful for beginners.
For 1., it's possible (easy even? I've never tried this in a cross-compiling situation) to build packages on one system and push them to another via SSH.
I suppose an upgrade would still result in two copies of everything, at least temporarily, but at least the target system doesn't need source code, compilers, etc.
https://nixos.org/manual/nix/unstable/command-ref/nix-copy-c...
I suppose an upgrade would still result in two copies of everything, at least temporarily, but at least the target system doesn't need source code, compilers, etc.
https://nixos.org/manual/nix/unstable/command-ref/nix-copy-c...
My computer is my "work station", so I don't want anything to change how it works without my asking for it.
Only FOSS has given me that so far. With the others, I inevitably run into "interface I'm used to changes without my consent".
Only FOSS has given me that so far. With the others, I inevitably run into "interface I'm used to changes without my consent".
I think that's only true if you never update your FOSS software, which the FOSS community in general seems to think is akin to skinning puppies. Otherwise it seems to me that FOSS developers are just as prone to changing interfaces for the sake of change as everyone else.
It's true for many projects, and I usually stop using them after it happens for the first time. Eventually, some software remains, against odds, stable. If not in the defaults, then after I apply my text-based, human-readable, source-matchable configuration files.
Also, I recently found Chicago 95 and am very pleased with the results of that five-minute shellscript :D
Also, I recently found Chicago 95 and am very pleased with the results of that five-minute shellscript :D
It's the only option that frees you from the effects of someone else's greed.
It's like coming home from a hotel. In a hotel (on Mac), everything is designed and catered for. At home (on Linux), you have to do the dishes but you can set things up just the way you want them.
that's actually a really good analogy.
and staying at hotels can be annoying sometimes, like having the room cleaners bother you, or in the restaurant trying to enjoy your dinner in peace the but the waiter keeps bugging you every 5 minutes!
and staying at hotels can be annoying sometimes, like having the room cleaners bother you, or in the restaurant trying to enjoy your dinner in peace the but the waiter keeps bugging you every 5 minutes!
I try desktop Linux every year and honestly, Gnome 40 is getting close, but Linux has a long way to go on the desktop before it rivals MacOS or Windows in terms of cohesive user experience.
This is an unpopular opinion in the FOS world but; I know I can donate, but I would love for there to be a high end desktop linux project that had a paid license.
It was actively maintained, adequately staffed and produced a user-centric distribution that could rival the high quality user experience you see in MacOS.
I tried to learn how to write a desktop environment a while ago and I am nowhere near smart enough for that.
I just want there to be an alternative to Windows and MacOS that is actually nice to live in on a daily basis.
This is an unpopular opinion in the FOS world but; I know I can donate, but I would love for there to be a high end desktop linux project that had a paid license.
It was actively maintained, adequately staffed and produced a user-centric distribution that could rival the high quality user experience you see in MacOS.
I tried to learn how to write a desktop environment a while ago and I am nowhere near smart enough for that.
I just want there to be an alternative to Windows and MacOS that is actually nice to live in on a daily basis.
I don't know about MacOS, but I do feel Windows is far from cohesive. The jump from GTK to Qt is no more than the jump from an older native Windows application to something in UWP for example.
You're actually right about that.
Windows has been on the user experience decline for some time now. Rather than looking for ways to improve the user experience, they are looking for creative ways to introduce Microsoft Teams. Windows 7, while aged (and possibly viewed through nostalgia), was a pretty amazing cohesive experience.
There is literally nothing I do now that Windows 10 does better than Windows 7 (other than the actual requirement for software support). Not only does 10 take longer to start-up, but the start menu was destroyed and the new Microsoft Store app design (UWP?) is hideous and unintuitive.
I tolerate Windows now because of software support. I have nowhere else to play my games and don't even think about VR on a non-windows platform.
MacOS is certainly a better example of cohesive design (with some caveats, like their Window management is from the 90s).
I would love to see a Linux desktop environment take the best things from MacOS and the best things from Windows. Gnome 40 is _really_ close and that makes me very happy
Windows has been on the user experience decline for some time now. Rather than looking for ways to improve the user experience, they are looking for creative ways to introduce Microsoft Teams. Windows 7, while aged (and possibly viewed through nostalgia), was a pretty amazing cohesive experience.
There is literally nothing I do now that Windows 10 does better than Windows 7 (other than the actual requirement for software support). Not only does 10 take longer to start-up, but the start menu was destroyed and the new Microsoft Store app design (UWP?) is hideous and unintuitive.
I tolerate Windows now because of software support. I have nowhere else to play my games and don't even think about VR on a non-windows platform.
MacOS is certainly a better example of cohesive design (with some caveats, like their Window management is from the 90s).
I would love to see a Linux desktop environment take the best things from MacOS and the best things from Windows. Gnome 40 is _really_ close and that makes me very happy
Got to agree about Windows 7, it was absolutely great.
GNOME 40 is pretty good, and I think KDE gets better every day, although they do have a lot of cruft still, inconsistencies even within their own app suite.
GNOME 40 is pretty good, and I think KDE gets better every day, although they do have a lot of cruft still, inconsistencies even within their own app suite.
I for one use KDE and it suits me perfectly. I think it is matter of preference only. For example I don't like MacOS UI that much. Some ideas are awesome there others not that much. Life is not black and white, nothing can be 100% perfect.
https://zorin.com/os/pro/ is basically what you're looking for
zorin is looking nice these days. ive been using pop os for maybe 2 years now but i think i might switch.
im not quite sure zorin counts as being "adequately staffed" though. as far as i know its just 2 brothers from Ireland working in it all this time, but maybe they have more staff these days. i can't imagine how they could pull off zorin os and also zorin grid with only two of them
im not quite sure zorin counts as being "adequately staffed" though. as far as i know its just 2 brothers from Ireland working in it all this time, but maybe they have more staff these days. i can't imagine how they could pull off zorin os and also zorin grid with only two of them
From my perspective, the era of switching desktops is over--I don't really have to choose anymore. These days I can run all the operating systems I need at once. I can run a Windows virtual machine in Linux and vice versa. If I need to run a Mac app, I can rent a VM on AWS. My Mac developer friends run Docker Desktop, which actually runs Linux.
I remember a time when the host operating system was an important choice that limited what kinds of things you could do with a computer. It's really not anymore IMHO.
I remember a time when the host operating system was an important choice that limited what kinds of things you could do with a computer. It's really not anymore IMHO.
> My Mac developer friends run Docker Desktop
Mac Docker is insanely resource-heavy since it runs through that virtualization layer instead of being native. Definitely a major source of frustration unless you keep your Docker stack very, very small or have an absolutely max-spec Macbook Pro.
Mac Docker is insanely resource-heavy since it runs through that virtualization layer instead of being native. Definitely a major source of frustration unless you keep your Docker stack very, very small or have an absolutely max-spec Macbook Pro.
That's right. M1 can be fast as hell but it's still not that great if you use Docker.
Interestingly, I just made the swap the other way.
I've been using Linux since the late 1990's (SuSE 5.x) and using Debian as my sole OS for the last 15+ years.
I took the plunge and bought a MacBook Pro M1 about 6 months ago.
What I miss about Linux:
Edit: formatting
I've been using Linux since the late 1990's (SuSE 5.x) and using Debian as my sole OS for the last 15+ years.
I took the plunge and bought a MacBook Pro M1 about 6 months ago.
What I miss about Linux:
- the choice of different desktops (warts and all!)
- zero friction software development (all the open source tools just work)
- privacy and open source
- as you'd expect, the OS and hardware are really integrated (suspend/resume butter smooth and faster than my Debian/Thinkpad experience)
- integration with my iPhone (sharing passwords, iMessaging on my laptop)
Edit: formatting
The main thing I dislike about it assumption that all software should go through the distribution's package manager, instead of application developers distributing their software directly to users.
This assumption has the important consequence that distros don't provide a stable interface (libraries, etc) that applications can depend on. Two years from now your binary may stop working when the distribution updates their libraries.
Most people think the package manager model is an advantage, because it makes installing things that are in the package manager easier, but in reality it comes at a big cost for anything that isn't in the package manager or doesn't want to be in it, including most commercial software.
This assumption has the important consequence that distros don't provide a stable interface (libraries, etc) that applications can depend on. Two years from now your binary may stop working when the distribution updates their libraries.
Most people think the package manager model is an advantage, because it makes installing things that are in the package manager easier, but in reality it comes at a big cost for anything that isn't in the package manager or doesn't want to be in it, including most commercial software.
AppImages are a common format for commercial apps which avoid package managers. The fact that package managers exist doesn't produce any "big cost" for using these instead, except that they're larger because all the libraries they use are bundled with the executable.
Similar story for me. Switched 5 years ago after 10 years with Apple. You have to be pretty determined to make the switch.
I love it. I’m really happy with the switch and have no plans to ever go back but it’s a decision you need to choose and commit to. I’d never recommend it to somebody else. If Linux is right for you, you will seek it out and make it happen.
I love it. I’m really happy with the switch and have no plans to ever go back but it’s a decision you need to choose and commit to. I’d never recommend it to somebody else. If Linux is right for you, you will seek it out and make it happen.
I really love Linux an use it for a long time. But the quality of software in macOS is the big difference for me.
Yeah Linux needs some UX love
My story:
I did exactly the opposite From Linux to MacOS. And this after more than a decade of using Linux for my work and my desktop. Everything began because I started to have battery and dock station issues with Fedora running on the Dell laptop that my previous employer provided me with. Then I asked IT and they suggested and somehow convinced me to try a Macbook pro and after debating with myself I finally did it. I struggled for a bit because of the brain muscle and all the habits in terms of configuration but I eventually adapted to it. At home, I happily continued using Linux. Even I bought a new Thinkpad not so long ago (p14s Gen1 with Ryzen 7 pro) and installed Linux right away as always. The performance was decent but I had many issues with my dock station (in my setup at home), suspend and some system crashes due to the GPU driver (Over Ubuntu and Fedora). I finally got tired and bought a MacBook pro for personal usage too.
I would like to summarize a few points that pushed me on my decision apart from the issue I mentioned: - At this point of my life, I only want technical challenges on my work (DevOps Engineer), not in my personal computer. I got sick of upgrading the kernel and having to spent a couple of hours every now and then fixing something. I just want to turn on a button and type. That's it.
- Also tired of the elitism of the Linux community in general. That feeling of superiority I've detected in many forums from people that presumes of using that twisted distro or Windows Manager.
- Also tired of the huge amount of toxicity and fanaticism (systemd rants, Canonical/Ubuntu sucks, this and that).
- The quality of the laptop (material and display). Mac devices are expensive. I spent on mine 2800£ but I think it worths the investment comparing it with any of the numerous Dell/Acer/Thinkpads I've owned before.
- Lack of software. Apart from computers, I like to make music. Options like Cubase are not available for Linux.
- From a users perspective, the philosophy of 'everything has to be free' (free in terms of price).
Note: Any of the previous points are just *personal* appreciations and conclusions and just have changed things in terms of personal tooling. For infrastructure I managed, Linux forever. Maybe (and probably) I am not right or being unfair but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I did exactly the opposite From Linux to MacOS. And this after more than a decade of using Linux for my work and my desktop. Everything began because I started to have battery and dock station issues with Fedora running on the Dell laptop that my previous employer provided me with. Then I asked IT and they suggested and somehow convinced me to try a Macbook pro and after debating with myself I finally did it. I struggled for a bit because of the brain muscle and all the habits in terms of configuration but I eventually adapted to it. At home, I happily continued using Linux. Even I bought a new Thinkpad not so long ago (p14s Gen1 with Ryzen 7 pro) and installed Linux right away as always. The performance was decent but I had many issues with my dock station (in my setup at home), suspend and some system crashes due to the GPU driver (Over Ubuntu and Fedora). I finally got tired and bought a MacBook pro for personal usage too.
I would like to summarize a few points that pushed me on my decision apart from the issue I mentioned: - At this point of my life, I only want technical challenges on my work (DevOps Engineer), not in my personal computer. I got sick of upgrading the kernel and having to spent a couple of hours every now and then fixing something. I just want to turn on a button and type. That's it.
- Also tired of the elitism of the Linux community in general. That feeling of superiority I've detected in many forums from people that presumes of using that twisted distro or Windows Manager.
- Also tired of the huge amount of toxicity and fanaticism (systemd rants, Canonical/Ubuntu sucks, this and that).
- The quality of the laptop (material and display). Mac devices are expensive. I spent on mine 2800£ but I think it worths the investment comparing it with any of the numerous Dell/Acer/Thinkpads I've owned before.
- Lack of software. Apart from computers, I like to make music. Options like Cubase are not available for Linux.
- From a users perspective, the philosophy of 'everything has to be free' (free in terms of price).
Note: Any of the previous points are just *personal* appreciations and conclusions and just have changed things in terms of personal tooling. For infrastructure I managed, Linux forever. Maybe (and probably) I am not right or being unfair but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
Our stories are similar. +1000.
I think you would need to be a tinkerer to enjoy the Linux experience fully. I've running Linux on desktop (and servers) for 15 years at least and there has always been tinkering, although much less the last 5 years or so.
Genuine question:
By "tinkering" do you mean every once in a while something really important completely stops working and you have to pull your hair out in the middle of some important work in order to get that thing fixed so you can use your computer properly again, which usually involves a series of incomprehensible steps you found on the 17th page of a phpBB forum thread?
Or...?
Because, that being one primary reason many people choose macOS over Windows, it would really suck.
Asking because the article was interesting, Gnome looked great, and it'd be genuinely fantastic if this assumption on my part was wrong.
By "tinkering" do you mean every once in a while something really important completely stops working and you have to pull your hair out in the middle of some important work in order to get that thing fixed so you can use your computer properly again, which usually involves a series of incomprehensible steps you found on the 17th page of a phpBB forum thread?
Or...?
Because, that being one primary reason many people choose macOS over Windows, it would really suck.
Asking because the article was interesting, Gnome looked great, and it'd be genuinely fantastic if this assumption on my part was wrong.
Unless you are on a rolling release distribution things don't just stop working out of the blue.
But if you want to have some new thing or change something so it works more how you would like, that can lead to some tinkering.
But if you want to have some new thing or change something so it works more how you would like, that can lead to some tinkering.
Agree - a rolling-release-distribution (e.g. Gentoo, which is the one I'm using) can update anytime any software/program to any major higher version (which might have "breaking" changes) anytime => I never do any update when I know that I'll absolutely need the system anytime soon (e.g. not now that I'm changing flat as I need Libreoffice&Cups to write&print docs).
To me it means I think of a workflow which would make things smoother for me, I make it so I can do that. But it takes tinkering.
I see something nice someone is using or has done. Then I can copy their config, but that's their personal config and I want something slightly different. That takes tinkering.
OSX is basically: Use it as designed. And it's designed for what most people want, but if you want to push the boundaries of that you are going to have a frustrating experience.
I see something nice someone is using or has done. Then I can copy their config, but that's their personal config and I want something slightly different. That takes tinkering.
OSX is basically: Use it as designed. And it's designed for what most people want, but if you want to push the boundaries of that you are going to have a frustrating experience.
I made the reverse switch, many years ago. I made the switch because macOS lets me use the commercial products I need to deal with administrators (MS word, excel, mainly), while also letting me use unix.
As I understand it, modern windows environments provide a linux layer, and so they would be a viable choice now, except if you want your desktop to integrate easily with other apple products.
One thing I don't miss about linux is the level of fiddling that it required. At one point linux was the only alternative to expensive workstations (betraying my age here) and so it was worth the pain of rebuilding the kernel, messing with code to get sound cards to work, etc. But the 1990s are over: you can get good power on a desktop without much expense, and if you know unix, you can hook up to large clusters in any academic environment, for computations that take days or weeks to complete.
Although I respect those who use linux desktop environments, I have stopped recommending it, at least to those more interested in getting work done than in exploring operating system mechanics.
As I understand it, modern windows environments provide a linux layer, and so they would be a viable choice now, except if you want your desktop to integrate easily with other apple products.
One thing I don't miss about linux is the level of fiddling that it required. At one point linux was the only alternative to expensive workstations (betraying my age here) and so it was worth the pain of rebuilding the kernel, messing with code to get sound cards to work, etc. But the 1990s are over: you can get good power on a desktop without much expense, and if you know unix, you can hook up to large clusters in any academic environment, for computations that take days or weeks to complete.
Although I respect those who use linux desktop environments, I have stopped recommending it, at least to those more interested in getting work done than in exploring operating system mechanics.
I also moved away from Mac as main personal driver like the article writer but I moved to FreeBSD which has less corporate influence.
However the shadow side is much less hardware support. For me that worked out fine but it won't be for everyone.
One of the things I love is not being stuck with one company's choices anymore. I can decide when I want to install updates, not beg Microsoft not to reboot my computer. I can decide how I want the UI to function instead of Apple forcing their way on me. I'm not having to work around a bunch of tie-ins to cloud services which both MS and Apple do heavily. I don't have to go out of my way to block telemetry. My computer doesn't check if every app is approved by its vendor (Mac notarisation). I don't have my own computer spying on me.
It's a bit more work but it really makes me feel like my computer is my computer again. It's so worth it.
However the shadow side is much less hardware support. For me that worked out fine but it won't be for everyone.
One of the things I love is not being stuck with one company's choices anymore. I can decide when I want to install updates, not beg Microsoft not to reboot my computer. I can decide how I want the UI to function instead of Apple forcing their way on me. I'm not having to work around a bunch of tie-ins to cloud services which both MS and Apple do heavily. I don't have to go out of my way to block telemetry. My computer doesn't check if every app is approved by its vendor (Mac notarisation). I don't have my own computer spying on me.
It's a bit more work but it really makes me feel like my computer is my computer again. It's so worth it.
My favorite thing about booting up my windows partition is that I immediately have to restart for updates.
For nearly one month now I am working on switching from MacOS to linux desktop and after experimenting a lot, the switch is pretty near.
I'm using a Lenovo T460s WQHD, and the most important advice I could give you:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs-docs/blob/91d28894a74a19f...
https://int3ractive.com/blog/2018/make-the-best-of-macbook-t...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exQh0_JKBJQ
https://github.com/esjeon/krohnkite
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2eYFnH61tmytImy1mTYvhA
I'm using a Lenovo T460s WQHD, and the most important advice I could give you:
- First try with a VM is ok, but if you really plan to switch, try on REAL HARDWARE - most of the issues I had was not using hardware with Linux support (e.g. Wifi)
- Don't try to "rebuild" MacOS or Windows - change the mindset to linux
- Plan a huge amount of time (weeks) for getting a neat set up and try at least for 4 Weeks, before you give up
- Make a list of what are really MUST have features at the end and keep it as short as possible
- Understand at least the fundamentals of the boot process, the X Server, Desktop Environments/Window Managers/Display Managers, Terminal / Shell / TTY
- Don't switch distro too early - if something does not work, try to stick to your choice and fix the problems
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs-docs/blob/91d28894a74a19f...
https://int3ractive.com/blog/2018/make-the-best-of-macbook-t...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exQh0_JKBJQ
https://github.com/esjeon/krohnkite
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2eYFnH61tmytImy1mTYvhA
The three things I wish were better on Linux were Wayland, the Audio stack, and the software packaging process (no one seems to be able to agree between flatpak, app image, or snap)
I feel like that would go a long way to making things better
I feel like that would go a long way to making things better
Does anyone know of a good resource to identify and explain unnecessary launchctl daemons, that I can then disable? My $4k Intel Macbook, new this year, can’t even smoothly handle cursor movement in vim/neovim because of the bloatware and possibly T2 chip interference, and it is driving me up the wall. Or if anyone has experience running the nearest thing to an open source version of MacOS, I’d love to get your pointers.
If I can’t solve this then I will switch to Ubuntu but as others have pointed out, I can see it will be a big time sink, that I’d like to avoid.
If I can’t solve this then I will switch to Ubuntu but as others have pointed out, I can see it will be a big time sink, that I’d like to avoid.
That... makes no sense. A default macOS setup should not have issues with cursor movement due to anything in launchctl. Where are you even pulling the T2 bit from...?
Are you using stock Terminal.app or iTerm2? The latter is notably improved and might benefit you if you haven't tried it.
Are you using stock Terminal.app or iTerm2? The latter is notably improved and might benefit you if you haven't tried it.
Around 2015 I did the exact opposite. I still manage linux servers but gave up the desktop experience in favour of macOS. The main reasons were:
1. Inconsistent UI experience (GTK/QT). For me screen aesthetics is important, I spent countless hours configuring my desktop (theming, matching icons, recompiling the FreeType package just to enable the then-patented font hinting, etc). But even then some applications were somehow different: OpenOffice/Firefox for example brought their own rendering engine. While this issue has been solved to a certain degree, I still don't see that level of polishing as in macOS. Certain niche distros (e.g. ElementaryOS) try to lure users with carefully selected (otherwise very fine!) screenshots but it takes just a few clicks to see that the whole thing is utterly broken.
2. Related to the previous point: handling HIDPI monitors. Again, GTK/QT/slightly exotic applications have to be configured separately and even then it is a hit-and-miss.
3. The messy state of sleep/hibernation. When I raise this issue, I'm always told that this is not a Linux issue but the buggy implementation of the ACPI specs by the hardware vendors. Well, as the WINE team managed to reimplement WIN32 bug-by-bug, I think it's not far fetched to ask the kernel driver guys to circumvent these incomplete/buggy firmwares.
I want to switch to Linux, and made an external USB SSD with about 20 different distros on their own partitions. The installation for some was much easier than others!
But this week, I was reminded why I still use Mac OS 10.13. On my Mac, I tried to install ffmpeg with rubberband support. When trying to compile it, brew gave cryptic error messages and eventually failed. For something else, I tried installing qemu, also using brew. There were a load of errors telling me I'm using an outdated OS and should feel bad about it, and again, it failed after 156 minutes with some libiconv error that I don't even totally understand, never mind know how to resolve. Something to do with having imagemagick already installed. I tried downloading an image from docker, and the docker-machine wasn't running, and even when I started it, the pull command from dockerhub still failed.
On a Mac, these kinds of errors are unusual. On Linux, build errors like that are normal.
I want to be able to install software in less than half an hour. Whether it's brew, apt-get, yum, pip, npm, or whatever other package manager you wish for - recompiling all my software is extremely slow, and by the time it's finished I've already moved on to something else.
For as long as software continues to be distributed as binaries for Mac, in a dmg or pkg, I'll continue using my Mac. I do still have to recompile sometimes, but it's something I dread, because of the huge amount of time it takes. Requiring this for every software package on Linux is what's pushing me away from the platform.
But this week, I was reminded why I still use Mac OS 10.13. On my Mac, I tried to install ffmpeg with rubberband support. When trying to compile it, brew gave cryptic error messages and eventually failed. For something else, I tried installing qemu, also using brew. There were a load of errors telling me I'm using an outdated OS and should feel bad about it, and again, it failed after 156 minutes with some libiconv error that I don't even totally understand, never mind know how to resolve. Something to do with having imagemagick already installed. I tried downloading an image from docker, and the docker-machine wasn't running, and even when I started it, the pull command from dockerhub still failed.
On a Mac, these kinds of errors are unusual. On Linux, build errors like that are normal.
I want to be able to install software in less than half an hour. Whether it's brew, apt-get, yum, pip, npm, or whatever other package manager you wish for - recompiling all my software is extremely slow, and by the time it's finished I've already moved on to something else.
For as long as software continues to be distributed as binaries for Mac, in a dmg or pkg, I'll continue using my Mac. I do still have to recompile sometimes, but it's something I dread, because of the huge amount of time it takes. Requiring this for every software package on Linux is what's pushing me away from the platform.
> On a Mac, these kinds of errors are unusual. On Linux, build errors like that are normal.
I think it's the opposite, and the errors that you encountered are a good example of why, since they all appear to be Mac/Homebrew-specific.
> On my Mac, I tried to install ffmpeg with rubberband support. When trying to compile it, brew gave cryptic error messages and eventually failed.
The FFmpeg in my distro's packages (OpenSUSE) and in Ubuntu's packages comes with rubberband already enabled. They are binary packages - no compilation needed, and it all just works. When I last used Homebrew I was surprised at how often it needed to compile things. For Linux users, compilation is rare.
> For something else, I tried installing qemu, also using brew. There were a load of errors telling me I'm using an outdated OS and should feel bad about it, and again, it failed after 156 minutes with some libiconv error that I don't even totally understand, never mind know how to resolve.
libiconv is not a thing in GNU/Linux. In Linux, iconv() is part of libc. libiconv is only used to port software to platforms which don't have iconv, or have an iconv() which is deficient in some way. Also, again, my distro and Ubuntu both include a binary package for qemu - no compilation needed.
> Whether it's brew, apt-get, yum, pip, npm, or whatever other package manager you wish for - recompiling all my software is extremely slow, and by the time it's finished I've already moved on to something else. [...] Requiring this for every software package on Linux is what's pushing me away from the platform.
I think you have the wrong idea about apt-get and package managers on Linux. Most distro package managers do not compile your software. Almost all the popular distros have binary package managers, which means compilation errors (on your machine) are not possible. Ironically, Homebrew (and Cygwin) users spend a lot more time compiling than Linux users do, so don't let your experience with Homebrew colour your opinion of Linux. They are not alike.
I think it's the opposite, and the errors that you encountered are a good example of why, since they all appear to be Mac/Homebrew-specific.
> On my Mac, I tried to install ffmpeg with rubberband support. When trying to compile it, brew gave cryptic error messages and eventually failed.
The FFmpeg in my distro's packages (OpenSUSE) and in Ubuntu's packages comes with rubberband already enabled. They are binary packages - no compilation needed, and it all just works. When I last used Homebrew I was surprised at how often it needed to compile things. For Linux users, compilation is rare.
> For something else, I tried installing qemu, also using brew. There were a load of errors telling me I'm using an outdated OS and should feel bad about it, and again, it failed after 156 minutes with some libiconv error that I don't even totally understand, never mind know how to resolve.
libiconv is not a thing in GNU/Linux. In Linux, iconv() is part of libc. libiconv is only used to port software to platforms which don't have iconv, or have an iconv() which is deficient in some way. Also, again, my distro and Ubuntu both include a binary package for qemu - no compilation needed.
> Whether it's brew, apt-get, yum, pip, npm, or whatever other package manager you wish for - recompiling all my software is extremely slow, and by the time it's finished I've already moved on to something else. [...] Requiring this for every software package on Linux is what's pushing me away from the platform.
I think you have the wrong idea about apt-get and package managers on Linux. Most distro package managers do not compile your software. Almost all the popular distros have binary package managers, which means compilation errors (on your machine) are not possible. Ironically, Homebrew (and Cygwin) users spend a lot more time compiling than Linux users do, so don't let your experience with Homebrew colour your opinion of Linux. They are not alike.
IMO the power of Linux distros is the package manager. The ~2.5 hour journey that you described on macOS should take less than a minute on most Linux distros. During my (somewhat brief) time with macOS, brew was a primary source of frustration.
You say that recompiling software is slow and errors during compilation are normal on Linux. I don't find myself compiling software very often. Most things are grabbed as binaries by the package manager. For everything else there's the AUR (which I rarely experience issues with.)
You say that recompiling software is slow and errors during compilation are normal on Linux. I don't find myself compiling software very often. Most things are grabbed as binaries by the package manager. For everything else there's the AUR (which I rarely experience issues with.)
> IMO the power of Linux distros is the package manager. The ~2.5 hour journey that you described on macOS should take less than a minute on most Linux distros.
Unless of course said software is not in your repo, then expect that it will take at least 2.5 hours.
Unless of course said software is not in your repo, then expect that it will take at least 2.5 hours.
2.5 hours? That sounds like a severe exaggeration. For example, most software in the Arch User Repository installs in a few minutes or less on reasonably modern hardware. In many cases, Linux users also have the option of installing binary packages outside of their repos instead of compiling from source.
> In many cases, Linux users also have the option of installing binary packages outside of their repos instead of compiling from source.
In my experience that's relatively rare. Occasionally they have an AppImage, which is great, maybe a PPA if you're on Ubuntu. but otherwise the best you can do is try to hack some other distro's binary to work. For most niche software I've found that it is only available as source though. Then you get to try and get a working build environment...
In my experience that's relatively rare. Occasionally they have an AppImage, which is great, maybe a PPA if you're on Ubuntu. but otherwise the best you can do is try to hack some other distro's binary to work. For most niche software I've found that it is only available as source though. Then you get to try and get a working build environment...
Unless you're using one of the very few Linux distributions that require you to compile everything from source (such as Gentoo), almost all of the packages are precompiled binaries and there is no compilation involved on your end.
Well brew is absolute crap, and most Linux package managers are better. I’d suggest using nix for macOS in single-user imperative mode. It functions pretty much like brew except it never pukes all over itself.
> But this week, I was reminded why I still use Mac OS 10.13.
[Goes on to illustrate all the problems he's had... On MacOS.]
> For as long as software continues to be distributed as binaries for Mac,
Apparently it isn't, is it, since you've been compiling so much?
> in a dmg or pkg, I'll continue using my Mac.
So when are you quitting?
> I do still have to recompile sometimes, but it's something I dread, because of the huge amount of time it takes.
On MacOS. So you're dreading Linux. Impressive logic.
> Requiring this for every software package on Linux
[Citation needed]
> is what's pushing me away from the platform.
The wrong one. All the shit you've been whining about should logically be pushing you away from MacOS.
[Goes on to illustrate all the problems he's had... On MacOS.]
> For as long as software continues to be distributed as binaries for Mac,
Apparently it isn't, is it, since you've been compiling so much?
> in a dmg or pkg, I'll continue using my Mac.
So when are you quitting?
> I do still have to recompile sometimes, but it's something I dread, because of the huge amount of time it takes.
On MacOS. So you're dreading Linux. Impressive logic.
> Requiring this for every software package on Linux
[Citation needed]
> is what's pushing me away from the platform.
The wrong one. All the shit you've been whining about should logically be pushing you away from MacOS.
I wouldn't necessarily generalize issues using brew on a mac to issues all package managers on linux. Some of those errors might be attributable to OSX locking down application installation. You can install binaries on linux just like with any other OS most people just prefer to use package managers.
Why would you use brew instead of your system's integrated package manager?
You'll be back sooner than you think.
Linux on the desktop has tons of problems, some of itself, some of the hardware you have to use with it, specially if we're talking about laptops.
Using Linux on the desktop is like trying to use Mac OS for your servers. Just don't. Save yourself a lot of pain. I also dislike many things about Mac os and apple in general, but the alternatives aren't any better.
Linux on the desktop has tons of problems, some of itself, some of the hardware you have to use with it, specially if we're talking about laptops.
Using Linux on the desktop is like trying to use Mac OS for your servers. Just don't. Save yourself a lot of pain. I also dislike many things about Mac os and apple in general, but the alternatives aren't any better.
If Adobe Premiere ran on linux I would use it. But because it doesn't, I can't use linux, and that's all there really is to it for my particular use case. Any kind of big multifaceted analysis of linux is irrelevant to people like me.
I tried installing Ubuntu studio, the OS marketed for "creatives", and the first part of the experience is incoherent dialogs asking you to manually type the number of bytes you want your linux partition to have. You have to type in an 15 digit number or something not knowing how severe the consequences might be if you get this number wrong. Maybe you'll just waste a lot of time, maybe your computer hard drive might get fucked up and become unusable (until you invest even more time in learning how to fix it). I was repulsed and stopped trying to install it. I don't have enough free time. I installed ubuntu back in 2010 and I don't remember it being so bad. Maybe my priorities in life changed. I'd love to be a linux guru but I don't have time.
I tried installing Ubuntu studio, the OS marketed for "creatives", and the first part of the experience is incoherent dialogs asking you to manually type the number of bytes you want your linux partition to have. You have to type in an 15 digit number or something not knowing how severe the consequences might be if you get this number wrong. Maybe you'll just waste a lot of time, maybe your computer hard drive might get fucked up and become unusable (until you invest even more time in learning how to fix it). I was repulsed and stopped trying to install it. I don't have enough free time. I installed ubuntu back in 2010 and I don't remember it being so bad. Maybe my priorities in life changed. I'd love to be a linux guru but I don't have time.
Errr, I switched from Apple (II, and mac) after 20+ years of being a professional developer to -- Linux/embedded. To be fair, I was also a UNIX developer all that time, starting with Minix all the way back then, to Pr1meOS, HP/UX, SunOS, Solaris and blah blah.
The fact I had that UNIX background is what saved me. I was really highly technical and very highly rated Mac dev until about 2006 when I realised this was a lost cause.
I would not stand developing for the apple business these days -- these days, I can use my "embedded" skills on linux (or bare metal) and "be the tree that stands out from the forest" -- these days on Apple-land you are just chowder.
Mind you, I might have audio working on my linux workstation, but I can't seem to get the mouse wheel doing the right thing. That's the price to pay, and I might grumble about it (a lot) but it's better than having half the available API your app used to use just diseapear into thin air.
Mind you, I might have audio working on my linux workstation, but I can't seem to get the mouse wheel doing the right thing. That's the price to pay, and I might grumble about it (a lot) but it's better than having half the available API your app used to use just diseapear into thin air.
I don’t buy a MacBook for the software (macOS) but for the hardware. Apple simple makes the best laptops. They are second to none.
I've been considering doing this too for my dev machine. Thankfully I'm not trapped into the Apple ecosystem as I don't use any of their services (iCloud, Messages, FaceTime, etc).
On my work machine, 99% of the time I just use VSCode, terminal, Git, Docker, and a browser... I reckon all those will actually run better on Linux than macOS.
On my work machine, 99% of the time I just use VSCode, terminal, Git, Docker, and a browser... I reckon all those will actually run better on Linux than macOS.
At the moment Docker and Kubernetes are the reason I’m using Linux at work. Without those I’d just use the M1.
MacOS is basically Unix, so I don't think it'll run better due to the OS. The real reason to switch to Linux is you can get much more powerful hardware than Apple sells (or sells for a reasonable price).
Docker on Mac is actually running in a VM, since containers are a linux feature, not unix. You can't develop for linux servers like you can on a linux machine.
Literally any workload in the cloud is going to be running in a VM, this is total nonsense lol
The GP is talking about how developing using docker on a Mac involves a separate VM running Linux, not the production deployment. If your application involves lots of files, then docker has to spend a bunch of time syncing files between the host OS and the Linux VM.
It's a pretty well known problem. If you're dealing with a few smallish files you won't notice it, but applications with lots of little files (Node, Python, etc) will have to sync all those files, and that can be pretty slow.
It's a pretty well known problem. If you're dealing with a few smallish files you won't notice it, but applications with lots of little files (Node, Python, etc) will have to sync all those files, and that can be pretty slow.
...for a desktop, sure. For laptops, there is currently no real comparison on power and price.
I very much hope the rest of the industry can respond to the M1.
I very much hope the rest of the industry can respond to the M1.
Yeah totally. I only use desktops now but if I had to buy a laptop I think I'd go for an M1 MBA or MBP.
Not true, if you buy one of those insane chunky "gaming laptops" it'll outperform the M1.
Docker runs ways faster on Linux.
Also, I own a cheap Chromebook and in general Chrome seems to runs much smoother than on my expensive iMac.
Also, I own a cheap Chromebook and in general Chrome seems to runs much smoother than on my expensive iMac.
Every Linux distro needs to adopt something like the Arch User Repository (AUR). It is hands down the nicest way to install packages out of all OSes, including Mac and Windows. Everything is in the AUR, and if it isn't it is fairly easy to wrap it up and put it there yourself.
Or one can just use Arch + `yay` and move on already!
Or one can just use Arch + `yay` and move on already!
It seems better to use flatpak, snap or appimage. These can be created once and run on any distro. Flatpak and snaps also include permissions on a per application basis so you can have some level of sandboxing. It is also easy to have proprietary applications which could help with more widespread Linux usage.
That does seem better in the long run, especially if one has a very large disk drive. Until all packages are packaged up correctly, which could be many years from now. Something like AUR will be a necessity.
Flatpak allows for sharing dependencies so disk space is less important. Often times software don't use the same versions though.
flatpak and snap feel so heavy - the startup times are reason enough to dislike them
There's no reason for a flatpak application to load slower than a 'native' application. It just namespacing[0] to separate the application Do you have measurements?
Snap seems to be deeply flawed however. They use compressed files to store things that need to be mounted when one wants to run an application[1].
[0] https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap [1] https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/managing-ubuntu-snaps/
Snap seems to be deeply flawed however. They use compressed files to store things that need to be mounted when one wants to run an application[1].
[0] https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap [1] https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/managing-ubuntu-snaps/
Flatpak also has unescapable limitations. For instance, Flatpak-installed Wireshark cannot actually capture packets. There is no way to give it the permissions at all.
As mentioned in the issue[0], these limitations are not inescapable. It's just tedious to specify the permissions portal and currently there are no other applications that would require such a portal. So, not really a low-hanging fruit but certainly not insurmountable.
[0] https://github.com/flathub/org.wireshark.Wireshark/issues/4
[0] https://github.com/flathub/org.wireshark.Wireshark/issues/4
As far as I can tell the escape is run dumpcap on the host and pipe the results through a fifo into the sandbox. Frankly that's pretty ridiculous and makes the flatpak nigh-useless. I'm not sure why flatpak is unable to support the ability to just not sandbox the application at all to allow for this sort of thing.
I guess that's because "this sort of thing" is really a very special use-case that is the primary focus of flatpak. That said: nothing prevents people from specifying an appropriate portal.
I guess the intersection of people that a) want to run a network package capture program that for even for "normal" use requires root privileges or privilege escalation and b) want to run said app as a distro-independent software is rather small.
Since the aim of flatpak is to provide easy sandboxing out of the box, I guess that running applications without sandboxing is not rally high priority for the developers.
> Frankly that's pretty ridiculous and makes the flatpak nigh-useless.
Not really. There are plenty of use-cases where flatpak shines.
I guess the intersection of people that a) want to run a network package capture program that for even for "normal" use requires root privileges or privilege escalation and b) want to run said app as a distro-independent software is rather small.
Since the aim of flatpak is to provide easy sandboxing out of the box, I guess that running applications without sandboxing is not rally high priority for the developers.
> Frankly that's pretty ridiculous and makes the flatpak nigh-useless.
Not really. There are plenty of use-cases where flatpak shines.
> I guess the intersection of people that a) want to run a network package capture program that for even for "normal" use requires root privileges or privilege escalation and b) want to run said app as a distro-independent software is rather small.
I don't see how these two things are at all related. There's no fundamental reason I can't have distro-independent software that is also able to run with root privileges if the user desires it. So it seems to me that Flatpak has baked-in this limitation (along with a bunch of others, but I digress).
> Since the aim of flatpak is to provide easy sandboxing out of the box, I guess that running applications without sandboxing is not rally high priority for the developers.
It would seem to me that not sandboxing something would actually be much easier than sandboxing it, but perhaps I'm unaware of a fundamental implementation detail of Flatpak.
> Not really. There are plenty of use-cases where flatpak shines.
That specific flatpak, not flatpak in general.
I don't see how these two things are at all related. There's no fundamental reason I can't have distro-independent software that is also able to run with root privileges if the user desires it. So it seems to me that Flatpak has baked-in this limitation (along with a bunch of others, but I digress).
> Since the aim of flatpak is to provide easy sandboxing out of the box, I guess that running applications without sandboxing is not rally high priority for the developers.
It would seem to me that not sandboxing something would actually be much easier than sandboxing it, but perhaps I'm unaware of a fundamental implementation detail of Flatpak.
> Not really. There are plenty of use-cases where flatpak shines.
That specific flatpak, not flatpak in general.
> I don't see how these two things are at all related. There's no fundamental reason I can't have distro-independent software that is also able to run with root privileges if the user desires it.
Nope, you're absolutely right; there is no fundamental reason this couldn't work. It's just not the focus of attention and so there's no work being done in that regard. Flatpak's primary goal is to distribute user software, so most/all of the work is done to deliver that use-case.
> So it seems to me that Flatpak has baked-in this limitation (along with a bunch of others, but I digress).
It's not a limitation of Flatpak - at least not a conceptual limitation. It's possible, it just has to be done by someone.
> It would seem to me that not sandboxing something would actually be much easier than sandboxing it, but perhaps I'm unaware of a fundamental implementation detail of Flatpak.
If the aim is to make sandboxing as easy as possible, that doesn't mean it will be easy to _not_ sandbox.
> That specific flatpak, not flatpak in general.
I'm not sure if I catch your drift.
Nope, you're absolutely right; there is no fundamental reason this couldn't work. It's just not the focus of attention and so there's no work being done in that regard. Flatpak's primary goal is to distribute user software, so most/all of the work is done to deliver that use-case.
> So it seems to me that Flatpak has baked-in this limitation (along with a bunch of others, but I digress).
It's not a limitation of Flatpak - at least not a conceptual limitation. It's possible, it just has to be done by someone.
> It would seem to me that not sandboxing something would actually be much easier than sandboxing it, but perhaps I'm unaware of a fundamental implementation detail of Flatpak.
If the aim is to make sandboxing as easy as possible, that doesn't mean it will be easy to _not_ sandbox.
> That specific flatpak, not flatpak in general.
I'm not sure if I catch your drift.
> Flatpak's primary goal is to distribute user software, so most/all of the work is done to deliver that use-case.
Sometimes user software needs higher level privileges. I don't see why that should exclude it from consideration.
> It's not a limitation of Flatpak - at least not a conceptual limitation. It's possible, it just has to be done by someone.
Flatpak has been around for 5 years, and apparently there are still so many unfinished high-priority things with it that I can expect to wait at least 5 more to see this simple use case addressed?
> If the aim is to make sandboxing as easy as possible, that doesn't mean it will be easy to _not_ sandbox.
I don't follow the logic here. The default state of applications on Linux is that they are not sandboxed. If flatpak did nothing but download and run binaries with appropriate library mappings it would not be sandboxed at all. The sandboxing is something that has to be added on top. When looking for information on how flatpak actually works I find only very obtuse documentation, but nearest I can figure it uses Linux's various namespaces, which shouldn't prevent CAP_NET_RAW from being used as far as I'm aware.
> I'm not sure if I catch your drift.
I was saying the Wireshark flatpak was nigh-useless. Not flatpak in general.
Sometimes user software needs higher level privileges. I don't see why that should exclude it from consideration.
> It's not a limitation of Flatpak - at least not a conceptual limitation. It's possible, it just has to be done by someone.
Flatpak has been around for 5 years, and apparently there are still so many unfinished high-priority things with it that I can expect to wait at least 5 more to see this simple use case addressed?
> If the aim is to make sandboxing as easy as possible, that doesn't mean it will be easy to _not_ sandbox.
I don't follow the logic here. The default state of applications on Linux is that they are not sandboxed. If flatpak did nothing but download and run binaries with appropriate library mappings it would not be sandboxed at all. The sandboxing is something that has to be added on top. When looking for information on how flatpak actually works I find only very obtuse documentation, but nearest I can figure it uses Linux's various namespaces, which shouldn't prevent CAP_NET_RAW from being used as far as I'm aware.
> I'm not sure if I catch your drift.
I was saying the Wireshark flatpak was nigh-useless. Not flatpak in general.
I did use the AUR a few years ago when I was installing some Kodi component on an Arch distro, but I wasn't thrilled about it.
I personally prefer Gentoo's way: user-owned "overlib"s for special stuff (and you would check the overlib's history to understand how committed the owner is), the rest merged into the main repository (if if manages to be merged, depending on QA).
I personally prefer Gentoo's way: user-owned "overlib"s for special stuff (and you would check the overlib's history to understand how committed the owner is), the rest merged into the main repository (if if manages to be merged, depending on QA).
> It is hands down the nicest way to install packages out of all OSes, including Mac and Windows.
Hard disagree. The best way to install software of all the OSs I've ever used was the original Macintosh way: Just copy a single file. The same thing was used in RiscOS, NeXT, and a few others and is the inspiration for AppImage.
Hard disagree. The best way to install software of all the OSs I've ever used was the original Macintosh way: Just copy a single file. The same thing was used in RiscOS, NeXT, and a few others and is the inspiration for AppImage.
I've been using GNU/Linux on desktop for over 15 years at this point. So glad that I don't have to use the latest versions of Windows which just keep looking worse and worse every year, to almost unbelievable extents. Mac OS I've always considered a kind of toy, akin to Android or tablet OSes. Cute, but there are far more important things.
I just couldn't imagine running a non-free OS on my own computers. Linux happens to be the one that I'm familiar with and I trust but that could change (although as the years go by, I doubt it will). But running a proprietary thing? There's just no way. I won't do it. Imagine installing wheels on your car that belong to someone else and having to ask permission whenever you want to drive. It's the same thing.
I just couldn't imagine running a non-free OS on my own computers. Linux happens to be the one that I'm familiar with and I trust but that could change (although as the years go by, I doubt it will). But running a proprietary thing? There's just no way. I won't do it. Imagine installing wheels on your car that belong to someone else and having to ask permission whenever you want to drive. It's the same thing.
I haven’t switched, but I am running a new Linux laptop over Summer break and it’s been great so far:
- The software (Elementary OS 6): https://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2021/08/16/1200
- The hardware (Lenovo Ryzen laptop): https://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2021/08/26/1400
I’d say that for a developer it’s a pretty much perfect set up these days. Definitely not so much for corporate work.
- The software (Elementary OS 6): https://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2021/08/16/1200
- The hardware (Lenovo Ryzen laptop): https://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2021/08/26/1400
I’d say that for a developer it’s a pretty much perfect set up these days. Definitely not so much for corporate work.
> My advice to you coming from macOS is to explore Gnome using either Debian or Fedora.
I love Debian. But really, if you want the best experience on the desktop you really want to be using a rolling release distro or something that’s released more often than Debian.
If you’re coming from MacOS something like elementary OS [1][2] might also be a good starting point.
[1] https://elementary.io/
[2] https://blog.elementary.io/elementary-os-6-odin-released/
I love Debian. But really, if you want the best experience on the desktop you really want to be using a rolling release distro or something that’s released more often than Debian.
If you’re coming from MacOS something like elementary OS [1][2] might also be a good starting point.
[1] https://elementary.io/
[2] https://blog.elementary.io/elementary-os-6-odin-released/
A better title would have been
"What is Linux and how to install Linux on a PC"
I clicked in hoping for an in-depth comparison between Linux in 2021 and macOS, and pain points were had moving to Linux from macOS.
There are a lot of those posts around but reading a new one I hope to learn more about what has been developing.
This is a fairly generic "How to install Linux", with a little bit of padding.
The most interesting bit of it I thought was "My MacBook 4-year-old MacBook wasn’t too compatible with Linux.
This is counter to my own experience, but I probably have not done it on that specific vintage.
Anyone know what the issue is that model?
I clicked in hoping for an in-depth comparison between Linux in 2021 and macOS, and pain points were had moving to Linux from macOS.
There are a lot of those posts around but reading a new one I hope to learn more about what has been developing.
This is a fairly generic "How to install Linux", with a little bit of padding.
The most interesting bit of it I thought was "My MacBook 4-year-old MacBook wasn’t too compatible with Linux.
This is counter to my own experience, but I probably have not done it on that specific vintage.
Anyone know what the issue is that model?
I was like full-time Linux desktop user for the 10 years, then switched to Mac and never looked back.
Linux had all the opportunities to be really good, but the development process was slow, hardware compatibility was a crap and occasionally I would loose a day or two after a postponed update (which got fixes already) to make it work again. I don't really understand why Canonical/Ubuntu dropped Gnome and worked 7 years for Unity, then switched back to Gnome again. 7 years developments and contributions to the Gnome could really make a difference.
Linux had all the opportunities to be really good, but the development process was slow, hardware compatibility was a crap and occasionally I would loose a day or two after a postponed update (which got fixes already) to make it work again. I don't really understand why Canonical/Ubuntu dropped Gnome and worked 7 years for Unity, then switched back to Gnome again. 7 years developments and contributions to the Gnome could really make a difference.
I won't switch from Mac OS to Linux because of Logic Pro. Are there DAWs available for Linux? Yes, and I don't like them. Are there DAWs I'd be willing to use other than Logic Pro? Absolutely! But that doesn't help my situation:
1.) They only run on Windows or Mac OS
2.) They're considerably more expensive
Having said that, there are some people who really like Reaper. I keep trying it and I keep going back to Logic Pro - and that's what keeps me on Mac OS.
Bottom line? It's the application software that will determine which OS you run.
1.) They only run on Windows or Mac OS
2.) They're considerably more expensive
Having said that, there are some people who really like Reaper. I keep trying it and I keep going back to Logic Pro - and that's what keeps me on Mac OS.
Bottom line? It's the application software that will determine which OS you run.
Considering as well. What's stopping me at this point is actually very little. One of the main points is that I need access to xcode for business reasons. But it's a pretty minor point as I'm actually not an IOS developer but just the one person in the company that can build our Cordova app with IOS. I'm actually OK with the stability of the software eco system. Most/all I care about is available on Linux, and actually works better there.
I'm mostly a backend developer, so intellij, vs code, docker (definitely better on linux), and lots of command line tools (all designed for unix type environments) all work fine on Linux. All the business stuff is cloud/browser based these days so I don't need MS Office or other stuff that was a big deal 13 years ago (when I last used Windows). And the few things that aren't are glorified electron apps that are available in the snap store.
I don't actually use any mac specific stuff that I care about (basically non of the i-* stuff). Never was that impressed with that stuff. I even process photos in Darktable (on a mac!) because I like it that much. And that is definitely going to be faster and nicer on Linux. Also, my steam library should come back alive once I move to a Linux desktop thanks to wine/proton being a thing now. I know my way around Linux of course as I've been doing devops and data processing long enough and have been dabbling with but never committed to Linux on my own machines since the nineties.
So, why don't I? Just two reasons remaining: finding good laptops that come close to my 15" MBP hardware is pretty hard. Apple did a nice job and they are miles apart from all the me too options out there for windows users. There are a few OKish things out there and they are similarly priced to macs. But it seems it's always something you are compromising on. And the second reason is just the amount of hassle involved with using Linux. It's a never ending stream of stuff that should work but clearly isn't which then leads to hours of researching why it isn't. Printer not printing, standby not doing its thing, etc. I've been there done that. Fine as a hobby but stressful when you have more important things to do. I recently installed arch in qemu on a mac. Actually works fairly nice. But it took me ages to get networking working. I could see myself using this and I get why Valve picked this for their Steam console.
I'm mostly a backend developer, so intellij, vs code, docker (definitely better on linux), and lots of command line tools (all designed for unix type environments) all work fine on Linux. All the business stuff is cloud/browser based these days so I don't need MS Office or other stuff that was a big deal 13 years ago (when I last used Windows). And the few things that aren't are glorified electron apps that are available in the snap store.
I don't actually use any mac specific stuff that I care about (basically non of the i-* stuff). Never was that impressed with that stuff. I even process photos in Darktable (on a mac!) because I like it that much. And that is definitely going to be faster and nicer on Linux. Also, my steam library should come back alive once I move to a Linux desktop thanks to wine/proton being a thing now. I know my way around Linux of course as I've been doing devops and data processing long enough and have been dabbling with but never committed to Linux on my own machines since the nineties.
So, why don't I? Just two reasons remaining: finding good laptops that come close to my 15" MBP hardware is pretty hard. Apple did a nice job and they are miles apart from all the me too options out there for windows users. There are a few OKish things out there and they are similarly priced to macs. But it seems it's always something you are compromising on. And the second reason is just the amount of hassle involved with using Linux. It's a never ending stream of stuff that should work but clearly isn't which then leads to hours of researching why it isn't. Printer not printing, standby not doing its thing, etc. I've been there done that. Fine as a hobby but stressful when you have more important things to do. I recently installed arch in qemu on a mac. Actually works fairly nice. But it took me ages to get networking working. I could see myself using this and I get why Valve picked this for their Steam console.
[deleted]
I have been using Windows 10 as my main machine for 3 years now. In the past I have used MacOS as my main machine and Linux for home projects.
The author says - "I used Windows before purchasing my first MacBook but returning was not in my considerations due to the state of that OS with inbuilt ads, bloat and privacy concerns."
What in-built ADs? I have not seen any so far
The author says - "I used Windows before purchasing my first MacBook but returning was not in my considerations due to the state of that OS with inbuilt ads, bloat and privacy concerns."
What in-built ADs? I have not seen any so far
https://www.windowscentral.com/how-remove-advertising-window...
Its even worse if you buy an OEM device or get stuck with Windows 10 Home.
With Home, once your PC finds out you have WiFi, it will not let you set up the device without a Microsoft Account, and it will remember your WiFi details even if you kill the OOBE and restart. (among countless other extremely user-hostile features Microsoft has added)
Its even worse if you buy an OEM device or get stuck with Windows 10 Home.
With Home, once your PC finds out you have WiFi, it will not let you set up the device without a Microsoft Account, and it will remember your WiFi details even if you kill the OOBE and restart. (among countless other extremely user-hostile features Microsoft has added)
Please fix the link to the gnome website[0], it returns 404.
Just link to https://www.gnome.org/ instead. Nice article and welcome to Linux!
[0] https://www.gnome.org/gnome-3/
Just link to https://www.gnome.org/ instead. Nice article and welcome to Linux!
[0] https://www.gnome.org/gnome-3/
What would be a practical reason to switch from MacOS to Linux? Also, what good laptop supports linux out of the box?
Sometimes I use macOS for work and get reminded why I prefer Linux.
- homebrew is slow and brittle, between 10x and 100x slower than pacman in my experience, and the only package manager I've used that breaks at least every year
- homebrew is only a userspace package mananger, many applications have their own update mechanisms. I greatly prefer being able to update my entire system with one command.
- xcode is a fragile 10GiB pig that I don't want, but homebrew needs it
- docker has a significant performance overhead on macOS
- the tiling window managers available on macOS are less reliable and don't have the features I value
- some terminal based software is significantly slower on recent versions of macOS, even on a 2019 macbook. I'm not sure what's causing it but there is noticeable lag that I don't get on much older hardware with linux
- documentation; in my experience searching for error messages on macOS results in something like "paste this command into a terminal, no one knows why, and it will break again on the next OS release" or "plug the charger into the left usbc port not the right". Where as on linux I end up on the arch wiki with a fix that makes sense, and I've learned something I find valuable or interesting
- I don't like how macOS is visually turning into iOS, I like that I have the option to use what looks like a "desktop" on linux
I'm learning nix at the moment, and hopefully that can solve a lot of the problems I have with maxOS/brew.
macOS is good, linux is good, as always it depends on what you need.
- homebrew is slow and brittle, between 10x and 100x slower than pacman in my experience, and the only package manager I've used that breaks at least every year
- homebrew is only a userspace package mananger, many applications have their own update mechanisms. I greatly prefer being able to update my entire system with one command.
- xcode is a fragile 10GiB pig that I don't want, but homebrew needs it
- docker has a significant performance overhead on macOS
- the tiling window managers available on macOS are less reliable and don't have the features I value
- some terminal based software is significantly slower on recent versions of macOS, even on a 2019 macbook. I'm not sure what's causing it but there is noticeable lag that I don't get on much older hardware with linux
- documentation; in my experience searching for error messages on macOS results in something like "paste this command into a terminal, no one knows why, and it will break again on the next OS release" or "plug the charger into the left usbc port not the right". Where as on linux I end up on the arch wiki with a fix that makes sense, and I've learned something I find valuable or interesting
- I don't like how macOS is visually turning into iOS, I like that I have the option to use what looks like a "desktop" on linux
I'm learning nix at the moment, and hopefully that can solve a lot of the problems I have with maxOS/brew.
macOS is good, linux is good, as always it depends on what you need.
I find developing to be easier on linux. When working with things that have weird c/c++ dependencies, they are usually available through my package manager, as an example.
I have a thinkpad and I have been pretty impressed with the linux support. I get firmware updates through my package manager, which makes for a nice experience keeping it up to date.
I have a thinkpad and I have been pretty impressed with the linux support. I get firmware updates through my package manager, which makes for a nice experience keeping it up to date.
Basically all those folks that buy Apple hardware, when they actually should have been supporting Linux OEMs, because they don't use anything from Apple other than BSD userspace.
I’ve been very happy with my System76 Linux laptop.
For me personally, I can’t update my laptop (2010 MBP) to the latest MacOS without trickery. It’s simply unsupported.
I plan on moving back to Linux once the core apps cease to operate — iMessage, easy transfer of music/audiobooks to iPhone, FaceTime.
Also, I’m pretty sure Dell and Lenovo have OoB support for Linux. Lenovo especially since RedHat is under the same umbrella.
I plan on moving back to Linux once the core apps cease to operate — iMessage, easy transfer of music/audiobooks to iPhone, FaceTime.
Also, I’m pretty sure Dell and Lenovo have OoB support for Linux. Lenovo especially since RedHat is under the same umbrella.
I am not sure I understand this viewpoint. A 2010 MBP is ~11 years old at this point, which is an eternity given how the past decade of laptops have evolved.
If you buy any modern laptop that's not junk, you're going to be paying hundreds of dollars. I simply don't see why you wouldn't grab an M1 Air at this point.
Is it Big Sur/Monterey...? Like, if you could upgrade, would you?
If you buy any modern laptop that's not junk, you're going to be paying hundreds of dollars. I simply don't see why you wouldn't grab an M1 Air at this point.
Is it Big Sur/Monterey...? Like, if you could upgrade, would you?
Yes. I have 0 intentions of purchasing a different laptop and instead will use Linux to prolong its lifespan.
Why would Linux on your 2010 MBP be better than your current MacOS on your MBP? Or is the real issue that you're looking to upgrade, and don't want to pay the Apple tax on new Macbooks?
It wouldn’t be. But once the native apps stop working as expected I will have no reason to stay on the MacOS platform, ergo, my transition back to Linux.
Native containers so no more docker VM eating all you CPU.
Thinkpads have pretty great Linux support. I haven't had any major hardware compat issues in a long time when installing Fedora on a Thinkpad.
My Thinkpad works great. I can't say the same for other machines I own, or other laptops.
What I hate about Gnome is that it's almost perfect but its paradigm includes huge huge window borders.
Oh well, on the plus side there's an actually perfect desktop out there already: i3. And sway potentially. I do miss Gnome's full-assedness (attention to detail and their strong opinions/focus) sometimes.
Oh well, on the plus side there's an actually perfect desktop out there already: i3. And sway potentially. I do miss Gnome's full-assedness (attention to detail and their strong opinions/focus) sometimes.
I've been on Linux for the last four years now and there are only two particular things that are painfully missing:
Stronger hardware driver support from vendors and
Photoshop. (Krita/GIMP/etc just aren't quite there yet, not to mention that most content/tutorials/etc are Photoshop oriented).
Stronger hardware driver support from vendors and
Photoshop. (Krita/GIMP/etc just aren't quite there yet, not to mention that most content/tutorials/etc are Photoshop oriented).
I won't be buying another apple computer (never had any of their other devices).
Part of the reason for this is that with the new apple-only chips they will be able to finish locking the operating system down and forcing everyone to buy software from the app store.
That's their revenue model going forward.
Part of the reason for this is that with the new apple-only chips they will be able to finish locking the operating system down and forcing everyone to buy software from the app store.
That's their revenue model going forward.
> The idea was to take baby steps and split my time between Mac and Linux but I quickly stopped turning on my MacBook.
I know that feel. I started wanting to "try out" Linux in 1995 or so but after a few shirt months my Windows partition languished, unused and unbooted-into.
I know that feel. I started wanting to "try out" Linux in 1995 or so but after a few shirt months my Windows partition languished, unused and unbooted-into.
I'm not sure if that's common knowledge, but I recently found out that KDE has a distribution called KDE Neon with the latest KDE releases.
https://neon.kde.org
I installed it on a USB flash drive and it's not bad.
https://neon.kde.org
I installed it on a USB flash drive and it's not bad.
> I wasn’t too locked into the Apple ecosystem. I don’t have an iPhone so the integrations were not necessary for me. I didn’t use iCloud, FaceTime or Siri either. If all of these are key to you, switching to Linux may not be worth it.
>My latest MacBook was four years old and was starting to feel a bit bloated and slow. It felt like a time to get a new one.
#FirstWorldProblems right here!
Seriously, a few hours doing a data backup and clean OS install would make the laptop feel snappy again...
#FirstWorldProblems right here!
Seriously, a few hours doing a data backup and clean OS install would make the laptop feel snappy again...
So which is the top distribution now for desktop. Last time I tried was Slackware.
I highly, highly recommend Elementary OS.
https://elementary.io/
It's the only OS I know of that's remotely close to MacOS in terms of aesthetic, and with Proton I can play pretty much every game on Steam.
It's the only OS I know of that's remotely close to MacOS in terms of aesthetic, and with Proton I can play pretty much every game on Steam.
Give Fedora Linux a try. It has been my daily workstation professionally and personally since 2007ish. Fedora 34 is pretty fantastic for hitting the ground running after you install.
I prefer Mint Cinnamon, which feels like a better looking and more polished Ubuntu with saner defaults.
'Top' could mean 'most popular' or 'I think this one is best'. I tend to just use stock Ubuntu (which with Fedora vies for the first of those senses), though some distros that are based on it like POP!_OS and Elementary are kind of appealing.
Either Ubuntu (Canonical) or Fedora (Red Hat).
See you again in a few months!
I switched about 8 years ago. Tried OpenSuse for several years but have settled in on Ubuntu with ZFS root on HPE ZBook G2 and Z workstations. The only thing that may draw me back is the Apple M* chips.
After 20 years using Linux as my desktop, my new job mandates macbook as the sole corporate computer, I probably rejected the offer should I had known this restriction.
[deleted]
I find it extremely hard to uninstall software from ubuntu unless the software was installed from snapcraft.
Due to the absence of a window's equivalent `Uninstall or Change Program`, I can't even recommend it to my parents either. There are a lot of ways to install software, but to uninstall you need to know what is installed and that isn't as simple as Windows/macOS.
Also since Netflix and Prime Video does not support 1080p playback on Linux (irrespective of your browser), I can't use it as my only OS either.
Due to the absence of a window's equivalent `Uninstall or Change Program`, I can't even recommend it to my parents either. There are a lot of ways to install software, but to uninstall you need to know what is installed and that isn't as simple as Windows/macOS.
Also since Netflix and Prime Video does not support 1080p playback on Linux (irrespective of your browser), I can't use it as my only OS either.
why is that?
I would assume GNOME Software or whatever graphical software package manager was installed would be enough for uninstalling things.
I switched to Linux after 20 years of Windows! Linux is just fine, I don't want it to become the best OS (already is)
Is Gnome still painfully slow/laggy? I switched to KDE about 5 years ago and never looked back.
Gnome is awesome. Gnome 40 brought some nice performance improvements. Using it on a six years old netbook with 4 GB of RAM and i3.
Apparently it depends on the hardware. And by that I don't mean whether you have a powerful CPU/GPU combination.
If you're lucky, it's smooth as butter. Personally I'm in the unlucky group (i3-6100U + HD 520).
Work is being done to improve the situation: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/1441
If you're lucky, it's smooth as butter. Personally I'm in the unlucky group (i3-6100U + HD 520).
Work is being done to improve the situation: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/1441
Give me an easy way to write (and test) iOS apps on Linux, and I'm all about switching (again).
Congrats! Linux on the desktop is very good. I see no point in using macOS for anything.
Linux lost when it decided users didnt need to know
1. What a computer is.
2. How a computer works.
From the article: "This means that the most important choice you have at the start of your Linux journey is to determine the desktop environment you want to try..."
You are the reason the world is breaking.
1. What a computer is.
2. How a computer works.
From the article: "This means that the most important choice you have at the start of your Linux journey is to determine the desktop environment you want to try..."
You are the reason the world is breaking.
No mention of Albert[1] anywhere in the article. It's the real replacement for spotlight.
--- [1] https://albertlauncher.github.io/installing/
--- [1] https://albertlauncher.github.io/installing/
i switched to linux in 1992 and never looked back
Feels like we have no choice but to switch to Linux for serious work nowadays.
Next gen Apple laptops will be selling you out to your respective governments for storing unapproved memes and saying unapproved things. They'll also be locked down progressively tighter, so Apple is able to extract more rent out of you even though you think you "own" the hardware. A decade ago I've resolved to not do any serious, long term work using tooling and operating systems that aren't Free. I've yet to regret this decision. It only makes sense that we don't allow trillion dollar corporations to deny us access to our own work 10-20-30 years from now. It also makes a ton of sense to store long term work in formats for which you could _debug the code_ if it rots over time.
I'm not a fundamentalist, though, so I use Windows for hobbies (audio recording, photography), but even then I watch out that the actual underlying work is stored in formats that I could in a pinch read with libre tooling on a libre OS of my choice.
Next gen Apple laptops will be selling you out to your respective governments for storing unapproved memes and saying unapproved things. They'll also be locked down progressively tighter, so Apple is able to extract more rent out of you even though you think you "own" the hardware. A decade ago I've resolved to not do any serious, long term work using tooling and operating systems that aren't Free. I've yet to regret this decision. It only makes sense that we don't allow trillion dollar corporations to deny us access to our own work 10-20-30 years from now. It also makes a ton of sense to store long term work in formats for which you could _debug the code_ if it rots over time.
I'm not a fundamentalist, though, so I use Windows for hobbies (audio recording, photography), but even then I watch out that the actual underlying work is stored in formats that I could in a pinch read with libre tooling on a libre OS of my choice.
Some distros are far less buggy then others... IE: I don't have any issues in Arch, but I did with Manjaro (often there was bugs that prevented updates to complete successfully).
Yah, Apple’s recent decision to pilfer my files has given me the final push to purchase a System76 Linux machine for my daily driver.
Gnome is the reason why people don't stay on linux
I was so happy when Valve announced they'd ditch debian/ubuntu and gnome
I was so happy when Valve announced they'd ditch debian/ubuntu and gnome
One of the reasons I enjoy using linux is the endless things you can customize, including the DE. You can easily switch your DE to something more inline with your preferences. Or you can install a spin with your preferred DE already enabled.
ok nice blog
"I’m here to save you some time and energy by telling you that the distro you pick doesn’t matter that much. "
That's the point I stopped reading.
That's the point I stopped reading.
It really doesn't. And the desktop Linux community's obsession with bundling a few tweaks and preinstalled applications as separate "distros", splintering the community into a million tiny sub-groups, is part of the reason it's failed to achieve mainstream popularity.
What's the best way to bundle those?
Just don't. Why bundle stuff if the user can just install it using the package manager?
It's easier to add to the system than remove redundant packages, and if the distro developers focus on the repositories and package management software it benefits everyone much more. That's one of the big reasons people go for Arch.
Nobody cares if LibreOffice or Inkscape or whatever is preinstalled. Just put a usable appstore on the taskbar by default, it works for smartphones too. Many distros are about as necessary as Samsung's or LG's customized Android builds.
It's easier to add to the system than remove redundant packages, and if the distro developers focus on the repositories and package management software it benefits everyone much more. That's one of the big reasons people go for Arch.
Nobody cares if LibreOffice or Inkscape or whatever is preinstalled. Just put a usable appstore on the taskbar by default, it works for smartphones too. Many distros are about as necessary as Samsung's or LG's customized Android builds.
Why would you bundle them at all?
I think Ubuntu-style 'flavours' of distro pattern work well. They're called Spins in Fedora.
Why is there such a fascination with having so many versions?
Off the top of my head...
Some people want to build everything from source.
Some people want a preconfigured Gnome enviornment.
Some people want a preconfigured KDE environment.
Some people want a distro with the latest version of packages.
Some people want a distro that is conservative about upgrading packages.
Some people are running in VMs and don't need all that extra crap.
Some people want a version that pedantically sticks to the spirit of the GPL.
Some people want a version that is maximally convinient GPL be damned.
I'm sure there's more reasons.
Some people want to build everything from source.
Some people want a preconfigured Gnome enviornment.
Some people want a preconfigured KDE environment.
Some people want a distro with the latest version of packages.
Some people want a distro that is conservative about upgrading packages.
Some people are running in VMs and don't need all that extra crap.
Some people want a version that pedantically sticks to the spirit of the GPL.
Some people want a version that is maximally convinient GPL be damned.
I'm sure there's more reasons.
I think you have pretty much covered all the main reasons.
I use Arch (formerly Gentoo) on my work and home PCs/laptops because I like rolling releases with a bleeding edge. I generally run Ubuntu LTS minimal installs for servers because they are tiny and stable and guarantee to be upgradeable to the next LTS release. I run Home Assistant IoT wranglers on Debian because that's what HA insists on for "Supervised".
My wife uses Arch because I look after it and she doesn't care. It simply has to just work and it has for years now without skipping a beat.
Upgrading hardware for laptops and PCs means dumping the filesystems to files on a server or whatever and blatting them onto the new device. If there is physical space, put the old HD/SSD/whatevs into the new box and use a live CD like system rescue or Clonezilla. All the drivers are built in out of the box. These days most things simply work with minimal fiddling. I can't remember the last time I fiddled with xorg.conf. OK I disabled the touchscreen on this laptop when I cracked it and that involved fiddling with xorg. I remember setting modelines by hand in XFree86 ...
I use Arch (formerly Gentoo) on my work and home PCs/laptops because I like rolling releases with a bleeding edge. I generally run Ubuntu LTS minimal installs for servers because they are tiny and stable and guarantee to be upgradeable to the next LTS release. I run Home Assistant IoT wranglers on Debian because that's what HA insists on for "Supervised".
My wife uses Arch because I look after it and she doesn't care. It simply has to just work and it has for years now without skipping a beat.
Upgrading hardware for laptops and PCs means dumping the filesystems to files on a server or whatever and blatting them onto the new device. If there is physical space, put the old HD/SSD/whatevs into the new box and use a live CD like system rescue or Clonezilla. All the drivers are built in out of the box. These days most things simply work with minimal fiddling. I can't remember the last time I fiddled with xorg.conf. OK I disabled the touchscreen on this laptop when I cracked it and that involved fiddling with xorg. I remember setting modelines by hand in XFree86 ...
Some people hate systemd :)
It gets on my nerves sometimes but then I remember the days of creating init scripts a la Miguel van Smoorenborg (with various dialects), upstart, Gentoo etc style OpenRC jobbies and the rest.
I get on with my day and you can barely see the blood dribble out of the corner of my mouth when I put the verb in the wrong position. systemctl rofl restart ... [fuck] backspace etc ... [bollocks][arse] ... hit enter.
I get on with my day and you can barely see the blood dribble out of the corner of my mouth when I put the verb in the wrong position. systemctl rofl restart ... [fuck] backspace etc ... [bollocks][arse] ... hit enter.
Thank you for the elaborate answer, so flexibility is key.
I ask the same questions about programming languages but usually get downvoted to hell.
Well, I upvoted you.
IMO it's about time we converge on just 4-5 languages -- each with unique benefits that can't be had easily in the other ones! -- and finally start to be truly productive.
Programming is mostly a complete mess today and everybody loves their own ugly disabled baby. Sigh.
IMO it's about time we converge on just 4-5 languages -- each with unique benefits that can't be had easily in the other ones! -- and finally start to be truly productive.
Programming is mostly a complete mess today and everybody loves their own ugly disabled baby. Sigh.
Upvoted and do like the idea, its an interesting question to see how many languages do we really need. I remember some paper from the 80s suggesting in the future all we would need is Ada and Lisp. This is somewhat echoed with the GNU projects attempt at C for low level dev and Guile for higher level dev and scripting. With no judgement of suitableness or not trying to exclude just tossing out examples, I'd guess it looks something like:
Small footprint systems language - C, Zig, Ada/SPARK; Higher level dynamic language - CL, Scheme, JS, Clojure; Full Spectrum Language - Rust, Red + Red/System; Basic low level embedded - Forth; Higher level static language - Haskel, SML, Java;
But already these start breaking down, particularly static languages are a minefield. Lazy vs eager evaluation, nominal vs structural typing are two major axis of differentiation there. Then for both static and dynamic languages the question of immutable by default vs immutable as an add-on. Further there's a question of do you need 3 languages for system, high level, and full spectrum vs picking one of the two approaches? And even this binning of 5 completely ignores to what degree concurrency should be a first-class concern of the language. Then there's the whole question of VMs and is there value to building your whole ecosystem on a shared VM? And further, now there's the problem of exposing functionality to non-developers. Should we include a tool like Lua or R that targets non-devs, use a tool like Racket or Red with their very explicit support for creating small custom DSLs, or is that a total non issue because the correct solution is to write GUI tools for that market?
Then the bigger question is, to kitchen sink or not. Languages like CL, Scala, and C++ have taken an approach of implement a ton of features and then trust the developers to sort it out. Other languages are laser focused on a single feature and then take it to its extreme, kinda like how Clojure does with immutability or Pony with actors. Yet if we don't embrace multiparadigm languages, we're leaving a ton of research on the table or accepting the zoo of programing languages.
Yeah programming is a shitshow.
Small footprint systems language - C, Zig, Ada/SPARK; Higher level dynamic language - CL, Scheme, JS, Clojure; Full Spectrum Language - Rust, Red + Red/System; Basic low level embedded - Forth; Higher level static language - Haskel, SML, Java;
But already these start breaking down, particularly static languages are a minefield. Lazy vs eager evaluation, nominal vs structural typing are two major axis of differentiation there. Then for both static and dynamic languages the question of immutable by default vs immutable as an add-on. Further there's a question of do you need 3 languages for system, high level, and full spectrum vs picking one of the two approaches? And even this binning of 5 completely ignores to what degree concurrency should be a first-class concern of the language. Then there's the whole question of VMs and is there value to building your whole ecosystem on a shared VM? And further, now there's the problem of exposing functionality to non-developers. Should we include a tool like Lua or R that targets non-devs, use a tool like Racket or Red with their very explicit support for creating small custom DSLs, or is that a total non issue because the correct solution is to write GUI tools for that market?
Then the bigger question is, to kitchen sink or not. Languages like CL, Scala, and C++ have taken an approach of implement a ton of features and then trust the developers to sort it out. Other languages are laser focused on a single feature and then take it to its extreme, kinda like how Clojure does with immutability or Pony with actors. Yet if we don't embrace multiparadigm languages, we're leaving a ton of research on the table or accepting the zoo of programing languages.
Yeah programming is a shitshow.
> I remember some paper from the 80s suggesting in the future all we would need is Ada and Lisp. This is somewhat echoed with the GNU projects attempt at C for low level dev and Guile for higher level dev and scripting.
This is an even more true argument today (minus the concrete language names). We desperately need such a curated subset.
The problem is of course us the pesky humans with short-sighted feelings we cling to as if our life depends on it. Desired job security is a big offender as well.
The pertinent questions today with regards to a language are:
- Is the runtime fast (if it's interpreted)?
- If it's compiled ahead-of-time, does it produce efficient machine code? (Golang is one example of machine code that can be better, whereas OCaml and Rust are known to produce some seriously fast machine code.)
- Are the runtime's performance characteristics predictable, e.g. latency remains stable under load? (Especially if the runtime has a garbage collector.)
- Does it run on a reasonable amount of platforms? ARM, x86 (32/64 bit), AVR, and a few more? Can it run on embedded devices?
- Does the language/runtime/ecosystem give you good parallel/concurrent abilities? Preemptively scheduled actors and/or green threads is probably the best idea for servers (Erlang / Elixir are good example do due to the underlying BEAM VM). IMO this is hugely important nowadays. Stuff like parallel iterators and parallel map/reduce/join/various-transform operations are other important enablers.
- Does the language help you avoid various bugs? Examples are Rust's borrow checker or many languages' support for sum types.
---
Additionally... why do we even use languages that don't get compiled by GCC or LLVM, at all? I am tired of listening to people's stories about their beautifully simple and genius compiler... which of course can't even do SIMD intrinsics or properly unroll loops. Yeah, "genius" and super simple indeed. /facepalms
Will we ever learn? Gods.
---
I've been around and I can claim that many times people get attached to the language simply because it has good libraries and good community. I fully relate to that and it's the reason why I want to work with Elixir even after 5 years of mostly uninterrupted career with it but... at one point, after many other problems are solved, you inevitably start hitting brick walls and you question your career choices.
I can't claim any strong experience or authority even after almost 20 years in the industry but so far only Rust seems to be a very good all-around language with a dead-serious and dedicated community that's trying to penetrate basically everywhere. The good news is that they might just succeed because the language is that good -- although it too started showing some warts but so far they're bearable.
But I don't see the world putting their differences aside and starting to work on a common cause. It's sadly not how humanity works. :(
This is an even more true argument today (minus the concrete language names). We desperately need such a curated subset.
The problem is of course us the pesky humans with short-sighted feelings we cling to as if our life depends on it. Desired job security is a big offender as well.
The pertinent questions today with regards to a language are:
- Is the runtime fast (if it's interpreted)?
- If it's compiled ahead-of-time, does it produce efficient machine code? (Golang is one example of machine code that can be better, whereas OCaml and Rust are known to produce some seriously fast machine code.)
- Are the runtime's performance characteristics predictable, e.g. latency remains stable under load? (Especially if the runtime has a garbage collector.)
- Does it run on a reasonable amount of platforms? ARM, x86 (32/64 bit), AVR, and a few more? Can it run on embedded devices?
- Does the language/runtime/ecosystem give you good parallel/concurrent abilities? Preemptively scheduled actors and/or green threads is probably the best idea for servers (Erlang / Elixir are good example do due to the underlying BEAM VM). IMO this is hugely important nowadays. Stuff like parallel iterators and parallel map/reduce/join/various-transform operations are other important enablers.
- Does the language help you avoid various bugs? Examples are Rust's borrow checker or many languages' support for sum types.
---
Additionally... why do we even use languages that don't get compiled by GCC or LLVM, at all? I am tired of listening to people's stories about their beautifully simple and genius compiler... which of course can't even do SIMD intrinsics or properly unroll loops. Yeah, "genius" and super simple indeed. /facepalms
Will we ever learn? Gods.
---
I've been around and I can claim that many times people get attached to the language simply because it has good libraries and good community. I fully relate to that and it's the reason why I want to work with Elixir even after 5 years of mostly uninterrupted career with it but... at one point, after many other problems are solved, you inevitably start hitting brick walls and you question your career choices.
I can't claim any strong experience or authority even after almost 20 years in the industry but so far only Rust seems to be a very good all-around language with a dead-serious and dedicated community that's trying to penetrate basically everywhere. The good news is that they might just succeed because the language is that good -- although it too started showing some warts but so far they're bearable.
But I don't see the world putting their differences aside and starting to work on a common cause. It's sadly not how humanity works. :(
Are you asking why everyone doesn't want the same things from their computer?
I'd agree that it doesn't matter much within a certain band of distros. Fedora vs. Ubuntu, for a new user without opinions about things like Flatpack or rpm vs. dpkg, doesn't matter much, sure, I agree. Throw in Slackware, Gentoo, Void, and Arch, and now it kinda does matter which you choose. Even Debian, since your software will be farther behind current releases and its preferences about things like non-free software are likely to be something you notice and have to deal with, one way or another.
But, among the small set of relatively user-friendly distros, sure, it doesn't actually matter that much. A generous reading would take that meaning from it, I think.
But, among the small set of relatively user-friendly distros, sure, it doesn't actually matter that much. A generous reading would take that meaning from it, I think.
That's why after trying out a few distros back in the day I settled with a rolling release one and truly learned linux.
I totally agree with the "uselessness" of too many distros but not with your conclusion.
There are multiple reasons for linux not being Mainstream on the desktop.
Windows comes preinstalled on 99% of all non self built laptops/desktops.
Installing an OS is not something the average user does.
It's different and people hate change, unless it's popular
I totally agree with the "uselessness" of too many distros but not with your conclusion.
There are multiple reasons for linux not being Mainstream on the desktop.
Windows comes preinstalled on 99% of all non self built laptops/desktops.
Installing an OS is not something the average user does.
It's different and people hate change, unless it's popular
I don't know if the splintering is that big a deal. For nearly everybody Ubuntu for personal use, rhel for enterprise right?
Ubuntu you just use gnome, and I've don't think I've ever actually seen redhat (or any centos) attached to a desktop environment.
Ubuntu you just use gnome, and I've don't think I've ever actually seen redhat (or any centos) attached to a desktop environment.
Been using Ubuntu for 15+ years and never used gnome. I always install xfce4 (which has basic tiling), Plank and a few other little gadgets. It stays so much out of my way that I basically don't even notice I'm using it. I tried one or two other distros but generally come back to Ubuntu because it hits the sweet spot of modernity and stability.
Red-Hat moved away from desktop, because they were the first to realise there is no money on Linux Desktop.
https://m.slashdot.org/story/100116
https://m.slashdot.org/story/100116
The splintering is real, but the differences between distros is also real. The pace of updates and the availability of packages is pretty important, as is a large community that you can lean on for support, even if passively by searching for solutions to common problems. Maybe you mean "of the 5 most popular distros it doesn't matter"; then sure.
I've noticed that people tend to think of the surface level of any desktop OS.
They think about the GUI, the command-line programs that ship with it (curl/grep/ls/etc.), the driver support, and the package manager it ships with. These are all trivial abstractions built on deeper facilities.
The farther down you go, the less people understand. Who actually can express the difference between X11 and Wayland that isn't full of weasel words and equivocation? What about mesa, or dbus, or pulseaudio? These are all core components that alter the "flavor" of a desktop Linux system. And yet, all distros basically use the same off-the-shelf components. They only change the higher level GUIs and package managers and stuff.
And people GROSSLY underestimate how much the kernel contributes to the "flavor" of Linux. (I could go on and on about how the GNU GPL directly impacts how drivers are developed for the kernel, or how the small number of core devs are overwhelmed by additions for hardware drivers which move rapidly and break things, and the subsequent vulnerability patches, leaving little time for desktop-focused improvements).
People tend to say things like "the kernel just manages the hardware" or "the kernel is just an interface layer for the hardware" or "MacOS and BSD are the same, only the kernel differs". If only they knew. The kernel is like a seed crystal that defines what can grow outward from there (without massive painful compatibility shims).
Lastly, people OVERestimate the importance of things that are entirely irrelevant to a desktop OS. Just look at how many desktop Linux users are arguing over SystemD vs SysV vs whatever else. Are desktop Linux users really digging into log files, and are annoyed that the log files are now in a binary format? Are desktop Linux users really annoyed that sudo is now part of systemd, instead of a standalone binary that they can swap out? I think the number is low, but the number of desktop Linux users arguing about such things is high.
They think about the GUI, the command-line programs that ship with it (curl/grep/ls/etc.), the driver support, and the package manager it ships with. These are all trivial abstractions built on deeper facilities.
The farther down you go, the less people understand. Who actually can express the difference between X11 and Wayland that isn't full of weasel words and equivocation? What about mesa, or dbus, or pulseaudio? These are all core components that alter the "flavor" of a desktop Linux system. And yet, all distros basically use the same off-the-shelf components. They only change the higher level GUIs and package managers and stuff.
And people GROSSLY underestimate how much the kernel contributes to the "flavor" of Linux. (I could go on and on about how the GNU GPL directly impacts how drivers are developed for the kernel, or how the small number of core devs are overwhelmed by additions for hardware drivers which move rapidly and break things, and the subsequent vulnerability patches, leaving little time for desktop-focused improvements).
People tend to say things like "the kernel just manages the hardware" or "the kernel is just an interface layer for the hardware" or "MacOS and BSD are the same, only the kernel differs". If only they knew. The kernel is like a seed crystal that defines what can grow outward from there (without massive painful compatibility shims).
Lastly, people OVERestimate the importance of things that are entirely irrelevant to a desktop OS. Just look at how many desktop Linux users are arguing over SystemD vs SysV vs whatever else. Are desktop Linux users really digging into log files, and are annoyed that the log files are now in a binary format? Are desktop Linux users really annoyed that sudo is now part of systemd, instead of a standalone binary that they can swap out? I think the number is low, but the number of desktop Linux users arguing about such things is high.
Some distros are far less buggy then others... IE: I don't have any issues in Arch, but I did with Manjaro (often there was bugs that prevented updates to complete successfully).
I've been using Linux for years, so I've got my opinions about distros. Why should the distribution a new user pick matter that much? They can easily switch if they don't like the first one they pick.
GP probably conflated distro with DE, which is covered in the next paragraph in TFA, maybe shouldn't have stopped reading after all.
Well, IMO, a new user should pick a distribution that has different DE's available in it's repository. That makes switching and trying different DE's very easy. As opposed to some distros which are specifically tailored to only a specific or supported DE.
Easily switch? You mean by reinstalling from scratch, or is there another way?
I’d like to know because I am interested in trying different distros but don’t want to have to keep setting up machines.
I’d like to know because I am interested in trying different distros but don’t want to have to keep setting up machines.
Stability of install.
New users probably shouldn't use a rolling release because updates can cause the install to be unbootable, leaving a bad impression of linux.
New users probably shouldn't use a rolling release because updates can cause the install to be unbootable, leaving a bad impression of linux.
What happens then is that the new Linux user soon needs a newer version of some package and they have to add a third party repo to their stable system and after having done this a few times, soon an update from one of them will cause the install to be unbootable.
I've had a way better experience with desktop Linux when using a managed rolling release like Manjaro.
I've had a way better experience with desktop Linux when using a managed rolling release like Manjaro.
And I’d like to know the reason
From native developer perspective...
Just tried to compile my Sciter project, full rebuild scapp executable in particular - standalone Sciter binary (HTML/CSS/JS).
- Windows / Visual Studio / VC++ - 58 seconds. Self assembled machine, i7 / 4 cores
- Linux / Code::Blocks / GCC - 3 minutes 24 seconds. MacMini 2018, i7 / 6 cores
- MacOS / XCode / LLVM - 4 minutes 20 seconds. MacMini 2020, M1
So no surprise that I am using Windows as my primary dev platform.
As always, YMMV, depends on what you are using your machine for.
Just tried to compile my Sciter project, full rebuild scapp executable in particular - standalone Sciter binary (HTML/CSS/JS).
- Windows / Visual Studio / VC++ - 58 seconds. Self assembled machine, i7 / 4 cores
- Linux / Code::Blocks / GCC - 3 minutes 24 seconds. MacMini 2018, i7 / 6 cores
- MacOS / XCode / LLVM - 4 minutes 20 seconds. MacMini 2020, M1
So no surprise that I am using Windows as my primary dev platform.
As always, YMMV, depends on what you are using your machine for.
Not going to put much heed in the opinion of someone who used Apple operating systems for 15 years.
Good thinking, someone like that is permanently tainted.
Every time I use desktop Linux (I've only tried Ubuntu), it's an exercise in frustration simply because cut and paste is such an incredible pain.
I use cut and paste every few minutes.
The keys are not compatible with MacOS - why not? Surely this is an obvious need. I seem to recall the cut and paste keys aren't even compatible with Windows. The cut and paste doesn't even seem to work consistently across applications.
Instead of just using the GUI, I have to constantly break my workflow to think about what keys I'm pressing - that's not a great way to enable switching to Linux from another OS.
If cut and paste is painful then we're a long way from desktop Linux being viable for me personally. It seems such an easy thing to get right, but that's the essence of desktop Linux - 20 years down the track and the first thing you do cuts your finger.
I'd be pleased to hear if some other distro has nailed this or if it's a universal issue.
I use cut and paste every few minutes.
The keys are not compatible with MacOS - why not? Surely this is an obvious need. I seem to recall the cut and paste keys aren't even compatible with Windows. The cut and paste doesn't even seem to work consistently across applications.
Instead of just using the GUI, I have to constantly break my workflow to think about what keys I'm pressing - that's not a great way to enable switching to Linux from another OS.
If cut and paste is painful then we're a long way from desktop Linux being viable for me personally. It seems such an easy thing to get right, but that's the essence of desktop Linux - 20 years down the track and the first thing you do cuts your finger.
I'd be pleased to hear if some other distro has nailed this or if it's a universal issue.
You might be getting bitten by Linux having two clipboards https://codeyarns.com/tech/2017-01-18-the-two-clipboards-in-... . If you use a clipboard manager (e.g. gpaste or parcellite) they can be configured to synchronize the two. Windows uses Control-C for copying and that will for sure not be compatible with, say, terminal emulators (hence Shift-Control-C is very common). No idea about the waffle key.
Could you describe the issue more? I've been using ubuntu for years and I've had plenty of issues, but cut and paste isn't one of them. It behaves exactly the same as windows for me.
[deleted]
> The keys are not compatible with MacOS - why not? Surely this is an obvious need. I seem to recall the cut and paste keys aren't even compatible with Windows. The cut and paste doesn't even seem to work consistently across applications.
Do you mean that they're not compatible with a macbook keyboard? control-c / x / v work fine on all of my Ubuntu computers, but I might be misunderstanding what issue you are running into.
Do you mean that they're not compatible with a macbook keyboard? control-c / x / v work fine on all of my Ubuntu computers, but I might be misunderstanding what issue you are running into.
MacOS uses cmd + c/v/x versus ctrl.
One thing I like about the Mac style for those is that there's less wrist movement (nice if you've got some RSI pain you'd rather not aggravate), and I can hit them while leaving 3 of 4 home-row fingers in place.
I'm not sure non-Mac systems preclude this. In fact, I never had RSI or wrist pain issues until my boss pressured me into using a MacBook. I now use a standard (= Windows) keyboard and remapped several keys.
On the topic of keys, Mac users often fail to mention the reverse situation. Coming to a Mac from other environments, the keymaps are not intuitive to me and often leads to frustration, especially if you're frequently switching between work (Mac) and personal (Linux) machines.
On the topic of keys, Mac users often fail to mention the reverse situation. Coming to a Mac from other environments, the keymaps are not intuitive to me and often leads to frustration, especially if you're frequently switching between work (Mac) and personal (Linux) machines.
> In fact, I never had RSI or wrist pain issues until my boss pressured me into using a MacBook.
Extended (hours, over several days) trackpad use is the first thing that's ever given me serious RSI, in over 20 years of computing. I think the action of click-n-dragging is the main cause. And MacBooks are the only laptops I've used where I don't hate having to use the trackpad for more than a couple minutes, so....
Extended (hours, over several days) trackpad use is the first thing that's ever given me serious RSI, in over 20 years of computing. I think the action of click-n-dragging is the main cause. And MacBooks are the only laptops I've used where I don't hate having to use the trackpad for more than a couple minutes, so....
I've never worked on a Mac, but I have Ctrl and Alt swapped and I agree that it's much more comfortable.
Now try doing that in the terminal.
but that's the readline shortcuts which are the same no matter which Unix terminal you are using, on macOS, Linux, cygwin, git bash, WSL...
https://github.com/chzyer/readline/blob/master/doc/shortcut....
I don't know if I'm an oddball but I'm switching all day long between Mac, Windows and Linux machines and I'd die if I had to use a different set of terminal shortcuts every time.
https://github.com/chzyer/readline/blob/master/doc/shortcut....
I don't know if I'm an oddball but I'm switching all day long between Mac, Windows and Linux machines and I'd die if I had to use a different set of terminal shortcuts every time.
The terminal in JetBrains apps is smart enough to know when ctrl-c means copy and when it means abort. It's definitely a solvable problem.
ctrl+shift+c / x / v
Does this work outside of the terminal on linux?
Bingo. This is the trick GP is likely looking for.
I complained about that for years until one day I founded you can actually remap Ctrl+C in your terminal, and the usual kill signal will still work when nothing is selected.
https://jpscaletti.com/p/5/til-remap-copy
https://jpscaletti.com/p/5/til-remap-copy
Fedora 35+ is the closest I have come to really enjoying Linux. Fedora always seems a lot more polished and less edgy. I cannot really get into any of the other distros for the UI. I like using Debian for all command line.
I've tried Fedora recently. The package manager didn't pass my stress test:
1. Did a minimal installation without a GUI. 2. Installed Gnome. 3. Installed KDE. 4. Uninstalled Gnome and KDE. The system ended up in a broken state: many important packages were deleted, I couldn't connect to the network, and the package manager stopped working.
1. Did a minimal installation without a GUI. 2. Installed Gnome. 3. Installed KDE. 4. Uninstalled Gnome and KDE. The system ended up in a broken state: many important packages were deleted, I couldn't connect to the network, and the package manager stopped working.
I tried the same in OpenSUSE, I was horrified.
Same. I've tried many, many distributions. Fedora definitely feels the most polished. Ironically, I find Ubuntu to be one of the worst, and it seems to be the default most people try.
(P.S. Fedora 34 is the most current released version)
(P.S. Fedora 34 is the most current released version)
> The [cut and paste] keys are not compatible with MacOS - why not? Surely this is an obvious need.
"Obvious"? Typical conceited Mac user. It's not as if the Mac were dominant in the computer or OS market.
> I seem to recall the cut and paste keys aren't even compatible with Windows.
Depends: Your whine doesn't mention what these "incompatible" keys you're whining about actually are. If they're [Ctrl]-[Ins], [Shift]-[Ins], and [Shift]-[Del], then those are actually the Windows CUA standard ones. The silly [Ctrl]-[C|V|X] alternatives copied from Apple are not standard.
"Obvious"? Typical conceited Mac user. It's not as if the Mac were dominant in the computer or OS market.
> I seem to recall the cut and paste keys aren't even compatible with Windows.
Depends: Your whine doesn't mention what these "incompatible" keys you're whining about actually are. If they're [Ctrl]-[Ins], [Shift]-[Ins], and [Shift]-[Del], then those are actually the Windows CUA standard ones. The silly [Ctrl]-[C|V|X] alternatives copied from Apple are not standard.
I don’t understand this comment, you can select and then middle click to paste or you can ctrl-c ctrl-v… what does not work for you? This does not sound familiar to me (a decades long Linux user).
Two possible issues the poster may be encountering:
1) Copy-paste shortcuts are different in terminals, on Linux, than they are everywhere else. They are the same, on macOS.
2) Much like drag-n-drop, reasonable support for copy-paste of things that aren't plain text is less common on Linux than on macOS, and attempting it is more likely to either not work or have unexpected effects.
1) Copy-paste shortcuts are different in terminals, on Linux, than they are everywhere else. They are the same, on macOS.
2) Much like drag-n-drop, reasonable support for copy-paste of things that aren't plain text is less common on Linux than on macOS, and attempting it is more likely to either not work or have unexpected effects.
[deleted]
Elementary OS is the only distro I'm aware of in which the default terminal uses C-x C-c C-v for cut, copy, and paste.
Copy and paste works. 100%. You are doing something wrong. There might be subtle differences in behaviour and you might have to change settings, or get used to the new defaults. Remember, the old defaults are just something you learnt once. There's nothing special about them.
One of the things I actually liked about macOS was the ability to use ctrl+k and ctrl+y in almost every application (looking at you Microsoft), as that was what my muscle memory had me doing from using a terminal and emacs on Linux anyway.
What about cut and paste is painful? Is it the keys it's bound to? Cut and paste for me is cntrl+x and v. If you want to change the location of this button you can configure that in Ubuntu.
But in the terminal they are mapped to Ctrl+Shift+c and Ctrl+Shift+v so the muscle memory breaks and is super annoying
[deleted]
the point of linux is making it your own, take the time to customize it ...
This will be super unpopular, but Linux missed the desktop boat 20 years ago, and my feeling as someone who at the time built his gentoo OS's from source, it was the fault of a few things:
1) Fragmented gui development. There were too many projects with none focusing on really making a better gui than mac/windows.
2) A lack of bread and butter 1st class "business" apps - you know, office. OpenOffice is fine, IF you are ok with the janky ui and no one knowing how it works.
3) lack of open source exchange type mail/cal/etc server and outlook-like client). Holy fudge, I tried to get this going and people just crapped on me for suggesting it.
4) Until recently, installing on laptops was an absolute crap shoot.
5) Just, apps, in general. Gimp is fine, but it has never been close to photoshop. GUI standards are all over the place, etc. People go to a platform because it has the tools they want. The real fallout from point 1 is no one would ever port apps to linux (a little hyperbolic - a lot of high-end post production apps and audio apps all made it over). Open source yadda yadda, thats nice (this is not a brush off, it IS nice), but the ecosystem could be light years ahead of where we are now.