3 ms·
Radarr sounds like the type of software that no vendor would accept in their app store. Why would you expect it to be available through a Linux package manager?
by II2II 5y ago
Radarr sounds like the type of software that no vendor would accept in their app store. Why would you expect it to be available through a Linux package manager?
As for the convoluted installation process under Linux, that is on the developer. They can provide packages directly, create a distribution agnostic application, or provide an installer. All of these approaches are in common use under Linux. None of them require the use of the command line. It is also worth noting that the second option is similar to how Mac applications are distributed while the third option is how Windows applications are distributed. The fact that Radarr's developers decided to do something else, something that required the command line, says more about them than it does about Linux.
With respect to user-hostile US approaches, please don't get me started. Windows itself is far from perfect in this respect.
- Gareth321 5y ago>Radarr sounds like the type of software that no vendor would accept in their app store. Why would you expect it to be available through a Linux package manager? I don't. I expect it and many other applications to remain difficult to install, so I expect most users to remain on PC. I am not levelling blame on anyone or anything. I am simply explaining how the user experience is hostile in Linux.
- II2II 5y agoI am going to make a claim that may sound a bit odd to you since it does not reflect your experiences: installing, updating, and removing software is much more user friendly under Linux. Almost every Linux program I use is available through a package manager. Installing, updating, and removing the software can be done through a graphical package manager that resembles the Windows Store. In an apples-to-apples comparison, I would claim the graphical package manager is more user friendly since it is focuses upon managing software rather than marketing software, but I can appreciate that opinions will differ. In the case of Linux, most software is available through the package manager. In the case of Windows, a significant portion of software has to be obtained separately. The typical case involves finding the vendor website, downloading the software, then running a multi-step installer. If the software doesn't seek out and install its own updates, the process of updating software is the same. Removal of the software is usually similar to using a package manager under Linux, but there are cases where dependencies must be sought out and removed manually (e.g. Visual Studio). Modern Linux package managers handle dependency removal automatically. Then there are the still relatively common outliers. Many Windows programs are distributed as zipped files that must be installed manually. Usually this is a case of extracting the files, yet you have to read the instructions to be sure. There are also going to be the uncommon outliers, with installation processes that resemble that of Radarr. (It happens, though I have only seen it with development tools.) In my experience, the software management frustrations under Linux come from a limited number of outliers. Ironically, those outliers all use installers that resemble their Windows counterparts.