3 ms·
I don't even try to measure you (not in any bad way at least :) ) >I find it curious that you're allowed an opinion about desktops but the developers who write
by konart 10y ago
I don't even try to measure you (not in any bad way at least :) )
>I find it curious that you're allowed an opinion about desktops but the developers who write your software aren't about the software they use.
Well, first of all, I am a developer, just as they are and by any sane logic - they are allowed to have an opinion as much as I am.
What you are describing (from my point of view at least) - is something similar to Garbage Collector. Yeah, garbage is not okay, but we have GC to deal with it. My point is - I don't like garbage in my room at all. Even with GC doing it's job - sometimes 'things' do happen.
And yes - you are right about the community part. This is one of the best things about linux, actually. Chances are as high as they can be that problem will be reported, documented (in some way) and fixed rather quickly. You can't compare Arch's forum (which did me more help even while I was pretty new to Ubuntu, ironically) to Apple's forums and most of the 'have you tried to reset your Mac's SMC & PRAM?" posts on the web.
>to do with my operating system, or even the concept of open source
But it's still part of it, face it. The fact that it is built into your workflow does not change this fact.
I'm not advocating for moving from open to proprietary, I'm just saying, that some people would rather prefer a system, that offers closed code, that just works. Apple did this and you still have the same opportunity to build and used open source on their system. I had apt-get and pacman, now I have brew. But I don't have to worry about some configs in my system I'd rather not know about at all.
- oliwarner 10y ago> I'm just saying, that some people would rather prefer a system, that offers closed code, that just works. Apple did this Again, I don't see why that only applies to open source. I've implemented both open source and proprietary software that have changed how they work after upgrades. Both have also provided long-term support on older versions to work the old way. When I say I build this into my workflow, the basis for this is understanding how the software I depend on is maintained. Things like Ubuntu, Django, Nginx, Postgres all have long and predictable lives if you opt into that. I can deploy something on 16.04 today an still deploy it on 16.04 in 2021. The infrastructure will have received security updates, but the APIs remain static. My software will continue to work as it always did. That's also how you'd aim to do it with proprietary software but you can still make bad decisions. If you insist on staying on the very latest everything (instead of opting for long term support versions) you will have to test and upgrade your application a lot more frequently. Just to round on Apple here, they're not perfect at this either. They make no commitment to how long their software will be supported and on average versions of OS X are supported around ⅔ the time Ubuntu LTS versions are. Ubuntu (or RHEL) are far better bases if you require a predictable and long-lasting product.