Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 152

Thread: Why Linux Sucks & Why Linux Does Not Suck (Lunduke)

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    FL / TN
    Beans
    89
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Great video... I was beginning to think I was the only one that saw things in that light.

    I few weeks ago I started a thread about the fact that not enough people donate and gave an example to the potential problems some distributions face due to lack of funds. I mentioned how I felt if we all donated a single dollar how it would stimulate what we have access to.

    Sure enough, some jackass chimed in about being worried about making someone rich richer and how it was better to just wait for some rich person to throw money at the projects and pray it was the one we were interested in...

    Are you freaking kidding me?

    This video explained why we don't have access to some great industry standard applications. Well there you have it... if you want Linux to be taken seriously as a viable business model, we need to put money into it, because money is what drives business.

    The whole free software definition is misinterpreted. We are free to run the software as we want, we are free to modify the code to suit our purposes, we are free to assist each other and free to redistribute.

    But that does little to compensate for the cost to make everything we use accessible to us... just the internet connection isn't free for us to go out there and get it.

    I agree with everything said in that video... There are some definite positive opportunities in funding standardizations. Not everyone has to adopt them, but they would be beneficial for closed source companies to experiment with that business model. I think that Linux standardized distro even if it wasn't free but say had a price tag of $60 would be a bargain when you consider what the alternatives in Windows and Mac cost, specially if it offered access to industry standard applications for LESS! Not for a minute do I think that such a scenario would be detrimental to linux. I am willing to bet that even the smoochers would find it easy to borrow that little bit of money from a friend or family (and never pay them back) to have such access.

    So ask yourself, do you have a buck to spare? Then donate it. It is the least you can do. Do with out a run to the candy bar, junk food machine, hell that crap costs more than donating a buck and its BAD FOR YOU!!!!

    How is it that he put it?
    Developers need to eat food too...
    OpenGEU 8.10 Luna Serena 64bit
    AMD Athlon-X2 6000+ / 8gb DDR2-800 RAM / Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-US2H / Nvidia GeForce 9600 GT / 640gb HD
    Acer Aspire 6530 : AMD Athlon X2 / 3gb DDR2-667 RAM / ATI HD3200 / 250gb HD

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Bucharest, Romania
    Beans
    1,427
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by bigbrovar View Post
    see the problem with linux? when we the users cant look at our selves in the face and tell ourselves what needs to be improved on with the linux desktops.. its not every linux problem that is hardware or proprietary software based. some are just obsession with bleeding edge and lack of standard way of doing things. i once talked about some issues i was having in the testimonial section and i was flamed down despite being very objective in my post. some people just cant stand objective criticism of Linux to them its tantamount to blasphemy. i completely agree with most of what was said in the videos and this are problems that lots of users face every day on the Linux desktop. non standardization of the audio framework,obsession with bleeding edge technologies that often times break compatibility and causes regressions, shipping buggy softwares with what is suppose to be a final release. scraping tested and trusted for bleeding edge technologies that are not ready for primetime and are less buggy than what they are replacing causing more problems than is solved. yeah i know the flames will start coming now. but whether you take it or not these things are the realities of the linux desktop today.
    totally agree with you. but for some people, Linux is not just an OS that, as any software, needs - and can be - improved. it's a credo, something to be defended from trolls/malevolent critics, almost as a religion. like all other religions, it's perfect and it holds the ultimate truth
    The limits of my language mean the limits of my world

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    FL / TN
    Beans
    89
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Sashin View Post
    I don't like everything this guy is saying. Standardization of packages would make it easier for linux as a whole but it would take away freedom.
    no it wouldn't... things can remain as they are. Offering a standardization model can coexist. And if that happens to advance linux development at a faster rate it would be due to the people having been free to choose in using a standard model.
    OpenGEU 8.10 Luna Serena 64bit
    AMD Athlon-X2 6000+ / 8gb DDR2-800 RAM / Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-US2H / Nvidia GeForce 9600 GT / 640gb HD
    Acer Aspire 6530 : AMD Athlon X2 / 3gb DDR2-667 RAM / ATI HD3200 / 250gb HD

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Beans
    6,115

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by bigbrovar View Post
    see the problem with linux? when we the users cant look at our selves in the face and tell ourselves what needs to be improved on with the linux desktops.. its not every linux problem that is hardware or proprietary software based. some are just obsession with bleeding edge and lack of standard way of doing things.
    Standardization is just saying another way of locking people down, what do we have to do just use one UI, one toolkit, one browser, one audio server, one package manager, one type of installer?
    I think linux needs to stay diverse, we dont need "standardization"
    Want one UI, one toolkit, one browser, one audio server, one package manager, one type of installer?
    Use Microsoft...
    HOME BUILT SYSTEM! http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/22804/ Please vote up!
    remember kiddies: sudo rm -rf= BAD!, if someone tells you to do this, please ignore them unless YOU WANT YOUR SYSTEM WIPED

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Bucharest, Romania
    Beans
    1,427
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyRabbiera View Post
    Standardization is just saying another way of locking people down, what do we have to do just use one UI, one toolkit, one browser, one audio server, one package manager, one type of installer?
    I think linux needs to stay diverse, we dont need "standardization"
    Want one UI, one toolkit, one browser, one audio server, one package manager, one type of installer?
    Use Microsoft...
    not it's not. Windows has only .exe's, but this doesn't mean that only one type of application per task is available. take browsers for example. or text editors, or media players. I believe you're mixing software standardization with platform standardization. from my point of view - and others might disagree as long as they want - having n! package managers, .debs, .rpms, tar.gzs and God knows what more, k! ways of packaging them all together (distros) is detrimental for the growth of Linux(as in market share). of course, for hobbyists, and I'm one of them (I've been using Linux since 2003, the way things are right now - fragmented - it's ok. but that's not the point. an OS for the masses (or should I say "human beings") != an OS for tech savvy persons
    just my $0.02
    The limits of my language mean the limits of my world

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by karellen View Post
    not it's not. Windows has only .exe's, but this doesn't mean that only one type of application per task is available. take browsers for example. or text editors, or media players. I believe you're mixing software standardization with platform standardization. from my point of view - and others might disagree as long as they want - having n! package managers, .debs, .rpms, tar.gzs and God knows what more, k! ways of packaging them all together (distros) is detrimental for the growth of Linux(as in market share). of course, for hobbyists, and I'm one of them (I've been using Linux since 2003, the way things are right now - fragmented - it's ok. but that's not the point. an OS for the masses (or should I say "human beings") != an OS for tech savvy persons
    just my $0.02
    What about .cab and .msi in Windows?

    Quote Originally Posted by bigbrovar View Post
    ....i once talked about some issues i was having in the testimonial section and i was flamed down despite being very objective in my post. some people just cant stand objective criticism of Linux to them its tantamount to blasphemy.....
    You were not flamed, in fact, many agreed. Don't you see a problem with self-proclaimed objectiveness? Any troll can say that, usually does, and every single word trolls type is objective criticism.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Abuja,Nigeria
    Beans
    499
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyRabbiera View Post
    Standardization is just saying another way of locking people down, what do we have to do just use one UI, one toolkit, one browser, one audio server, one package manager, one type of installer?
    I think linux needs to stay diverse, we dont need "standardization"
    Want one UI, one toolkit, one browser, one audio server, one package manager, one type of installer?
    Use Microsoft...
    let me start by saying i love your repy this time. now we are talking issues . Although i don't quite agree with you that standardization brings lock downs or limits our freedom. take a look at the *nix file-system structure which is standardized so we have /boot /etc /usr/ /opt/ etc you see the same structure on just about every distro.. also look at bash and the gnu core utils.. that is standard.. i could be on arch or redhat and run the same basic Linux commands and get the same result. how does this lock you down or limits freedom? what standards just means is that this is the way sound is handled for example .. this is how web-cam is handled. we all work to make this better and every app is built to work with that framework.. the very essences of free software is having standards for example when its comes to the GUI display we have the X server everything from gnome to kde sits on the xserver. and although the x server is not perfect but at least we know how to attack the problem and fix it. not so for sound.

    packaging might not be that easy. not because we cant have standard packages for Linux for lack of a technical know how. but for mostly political reasons and the fact that most distros like to work in isolation without looking at what is doing on in the other camp.. i feel each distro could still maintain their own packages, debian/ubuntu keeps their debs for e.g but at the same time there is a standard packaging procedure which all packages most adhere to.. and also a unified packaging format which (might need and installer) will work on all linux platform. and the standard for building this format is then published to reduce breakages. if you go to firefox site or openoffice or pidgin you would find out that depending on your distro .. installing the windows or mac version is just easier. the linux format comes in a .tar.bz format. which in most cases (except pidgin) can be installed by just dumping the file in /opt and running it from there. why not just have a standard package format which does this. this doesnt mean that we still wont have debs for the same program just makes it easier to make binaries for 3rd party applications so that people can just install them no matter the distro. the source codes will still be there for people you want to compile their software. which as u know there is a standard to compiling which works across all distros so why not just have same for installing binaries ..
    servant of the secret fire, wielder of the flame of Anor!

    Blog identica twitter lastfm

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Abuja,Nigeria
    Beans
    499
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhatever View Post
    You were not flamed, in fact, many agreed. Don't you see a problem with self-proclaimed objectiveness? Any troll can say that, usually does, and every single word trolls type is objective criticism.
    well you are right about that. but what i meant was that for every issue i raised i attached a bug report that showed that it was in fact a software problem rather than a hardware problem as most people were saying i was having. and to proof the regression problem that is often caused by obsession with bleeding edge apps and shiping buggy applications and libraries with the final release of a distro. even though i agree it doesnt take away your point about self claimed objectivity which can be subjective
    servant of the secret fire, wielder of the flame of Anor!

    Blog identica twitter lastfm

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    UK
    Beans
    145
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by karellen View Post
    not it's not. Windows has only .exe's, but this doesn't mean that only one type of application per task is available. take browsers for example. or text editors, or media players. I believe you're mixing software standardization with platform standardization. from my point of view - and others might disagree as long as they want - having n! package managers, .debs, .rpms, tar.gzs and God knows what more, k! ways of packaging them all together (distros) is detrimental for the growth of Linux(as in market share). of course, for hobbyists, and I'm one of them (I've been using Linux since 2003, the way things are right now - fragmented - it's ok. but that's not the point. an OS for the masses (or should I say "human beings") != an OS for tech savvy persons
    just my $0.02
    Totally agree!

    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhatever View Post
    What about .cab and .msi in Windows?
    and what's your point? .cab and .msi are not different ways of doing the same thing, they have different purposes.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Beans
    283
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyRabbiera View Post
    Its FUD, why this is being proposed by the so called "linuix foundation"
    I dont know...
    Perhaps a microsoft buyout...
    Linux Foundation gets videos from other sites and puts them in one place. That video was made from the guys at http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/
    MS skill level -- I press buttons and stuff happens
    Linux skill level -- I copy and paste into the terminal and stuff happens!
    Mac skill level -- Wear a black turtleneck and stuff happens

Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •