Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 152

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

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshuaRL View Post

    If you're suggesting a separate repo and packaging system for ALL Linux distros, that's not very likely, nor very worthwhile IMHO. It's like this: Debian-based distros are designed from the ground up for dpkg and APT. The security model is based on it; all of the updaters and other applications are based around it too. Same goes for Red Hat-based distros. I've tried running YUM on an Ubuntu system. It didn't work well at all. If you include a new system, there's nothing to say a pre-compiled and packaged application will work correctly on all systems. But that's the beauty of source code. It will. There's a set way of doing it for all distributions, and if it's needed it works great.
    So you think that having download pages such as this one is fine? It's a flippin joke to have that many different installers for the same software.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Icehuck View Post
    So you think that having download pages such as this one is fine? It's a flippin joke to have that many different installers for the same software.
    is it too much to expect that the user downloading something has at least a shred of intelligence and knows what distro and architecture they are running?
    Jabber: markgrandi[at]gmail.com

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Polygon View Post
    is it too much to expect that the user downloading something has at least a shred of intelligence and knows what distro and architecture they are running?
    Why do developers have to waste time and create that many packages just to get their software out there? They could just give source, but then they wouldn't many people using their software.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Beans
    6,115

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Icehuck View Post
    So you think that having download pages such as this one is fine? It's a flippin joke to have that many different installers for the same software.
    But Virtualbox is different in each system, like Opera.
    QT3 and 4 play a big part on why there is so many variants of Vbox
    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. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyRabbiera View Post
    But Virtualbox is different in each system, like Opera.
    QT3 and 4 play a big part on why there is so many variants of Vbox
    Isn't that because of a lack of standards? Wasting more developer time...

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Las Vegas, Nevada
    Beans
    743
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Icehuck View Post
    Isn't that because of a lack of standards? Wasting more developer time...
    And developers gotta have time to eat!

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by giant speck View Post
    and developers gotta have time to eat!
    bingo!

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Beans
    6,115

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Icehuck View Post
    Isn't that because of a lack of standards? Wasting more developer time...
    Well look at what Vbox installs on, OpenSuse 10.3, Mandriva 2007.1, Ubuntu Dapper and Gutsy, most of those have QT versions below QT4.
    QT4 is still new, and its also still very unpopular by many.
    QT4 is still very new, older distros that still have support have packages for them.
    Also Q4 had some revisions.
    Opera is very similar, it too offers a flexible QT as QT4 is not yet fully there yet...
    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

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    I agree with SunnyRabierra. Linux needs to stay diverse in the contexts this video, and other posts are referring to. I will point out that linux has adopted many standards which have been standards for decades:

    runlevels
    standard naming conventions
    standard compilers
    standard ACL's

    I say these are standards because you see them across variants of Linux and UNIX. Compared to windows, which has no standards, but sets "standards" with EVERY release of their OS which they rarely abide by. I've seen c:\windows, c:\WINNT c:\WINDOWS, I've seen the registry absolutely mutilated beyond recognition of its original intent from Microsofts own apps and patches, I've seen ACL and security changes, both in ideology and technicality, with just about every windows release. So how can you exactly say there are "standards" for linux's only real widespread competition? Where is your baseline, and is it really a baseline you want to hold linux to? Not me...

    Linux has standards imposed where standards need to be, which allows for everything else to mold as technology demands it to mold. IMO, this is the only reason linux is even in any sort of the state it is in today from a visibility standpoint. Sure linux has problems. Software WILL ALWAYS have problems. I'm not above saying linux has, and always will have, plenty which needs fixing. Why the linux desktop sucks is an opinion. To me, this doesn't hold any water. I'm perfectly capable of forming my own informed opinion. Simply put, if it sucked, I certainly wouldn't have been using it the last 3-4 years as my primary OS. I do not consider myself a linux apologetic, I just feel confident that for my uses of a desktop, linux does exceedingly better than anything else out there. Considering also that I put food on the table and a roof over my head based on how I support and implement linux, UNIX, and some limited Windows still (not near as much as I used to), I must be accurate on some level, or I probably wouldn't be doing what I do for a living.
    Last edited by toupeiro; May 1st, 2009 at 05:35 PM.
    "Its easy to come up with new ideas, the hard part is letting go of what worked for you two years ago, but will soon be out of date." -Roger von Oech

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Video: Why Desktop Linux Sucks

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyRabbiera View Post
    Well look at what Vbox installs on, OpenSuse 10.3, Mandriva 2007.1, Ubuntu Dapper and Gutsy, most of those have QT versions below QT4.
    QT4 is still new, and its also still very unpopular by many.
    QT4 is still very new, older distros that still have support have packages for them.
    Also Q4 had some revisions.
    Opera is very similar, it too offers a flexible QT as QT4 is not yet fully there yet...
    This is why commercial products(photoshop or AutoCad) are not available for Linux. There is way to much going on and trying to support every version would be too much of a headache.

Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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
  •