8 ms·

It seems his complaints boil down to: 1) You don't have the choice of multiple Desktop Environments (When was the last time this was not true? Litestep?) 2) W

It seems his complaints boil down to: 1) You don't have the choice of multiple Desktop Environments (When was the last time this was not true? Litestep?) 2) Windows applications and utilities tend to be GUI based. (I thought that was the whole point of Windows...) 2a) Stuff is stored in the registry (I thought linux people loved digging into and tweaking settings) 2b) Paths are different. (No kidding. But we've known this since DOS vs Unix) 3) Windows sometimes restarts itself (Again, there are settings that help, but Windows has done this for quite some time now.) 4) No apt-get|zypper|etc, must install exe or msi from the internet. Or use the awful Windows Store. (No debate there, the Windows store is awful. But installing the latest Firefox is a lot easier on Windows than Debian Stable. I rather like not having to fight with a central repository of applications.) Those have been the complaints of linux users for over 20 years. I feel like I'm arguing on Arstechnica circa 1998. Use the tool that's best for your job. I don't bitch about my socket set being metric when I need SAE. At this point the differences are known and well understood.

guessbest 4y ago
At least linux doesn't restart itself by default.
daemin 4y ago
Having Windows restart itself is a pet peeve of mine, but as long as you have Windows 10 Pro there are some local admin policies you can set to make sure it never restarts while you're logged in. This is the one key thing I do and it prevents Windows from restarting and losing your work.
- password4321 4y ago
  https://superuser.com/questions/1110265/how-to-prevent-windows-10-from-restarting-the-computer-after-installing-updates https://superuser.com/questions/1110265/how-to-prevent-windo... Reboot blocker utility https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19265417 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19265417 (Windows Home, etc.)
hguant 4y ago
Yeah, I used to get very pissy about everything in windows being stashed in the registry but...how is that different from everything being hidden inside systemd, or in a /etc/config file that is silently changed by services?
- ayushnix 4y ago
  > in a /etc/config file that is silently changed by services? I'm not really invested in the Windows vs Linux thing but config files in /etc never get silently changed or removed. If they are, it's a critical bug, although I've never really seen it happen. If there are any updates to the service files, they'll be installed alongside the original file. For example, on Arch Linux, it'll be /etc/systemd/journald.conf.pacnew while the original journald.conf file will never be touched.
  - aidenn0 4y ago
    Debian based systems will change some config files on updates; I had a systemd customization that was overwritten out from under me, and I evntually found there was one place for apt to manage and a different for me to manage.
    - ayushnix 4y ago
      > Debian based systems will change some config files on updates; I had a systemd customization that was overwritten out from under me, and I evntually found there was one place for apt to manage and a different for me to manage. The only place where a package manager should overwrite changes is /usr. If you made any changes inside /usr, then yes, it'll be overwritten. A user isn't supposed to mess around inside /usr, unless there's a very good reason for it. There's /usr/local but it's better to just use $HOME/.local instead.
      - aidenn0 4y ago
        It's entirely possible it wasn't in /etc but somewhere else. This was a case of "I need to fix this urgently" and the first workaround I could find on stackoverflow suggested changing it in one place. After the problem came up again after an update I did a bit more digging to figure out where I could change it and apt would not overwrite it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ulkesh 4y ago
> Use the tool that's best for your job. I don't bitch about my socket set being metric when I need SAE. At this point the differences are known and well understood. Completely agreed, and clearly the author of the article did not understand the differences before their endeavor, or they are trying to make a point -- one in which we all already know. One real strong opinion about Windows I have is the registry, which is at its core a flawed and archaic system. It tries to bring every setting and registered library into one single infrastructure and it has been the bane of developer existence for far too long. The registry needs to die. There is nothing the registry provides that can't be done simply within the sandbox of the application. And applications should be sandboxed. And don't get me started about NTFS. I find it odd, that the author, who claims they are coming from Linux doesn't complain about just how godawful slow NTFS is. To me this is the most egregious Windows issue. Sure, NTFS works, but when it takes 3-4 minutes to compile the same code on the same language/compiler in Windows that takes 30 seconds or less to compile in Linux, clearly something is wrong. I simply cannot develop on Windows -- efficiency is completely lost.
- legalcorrection 4y ago
  It's funny that with the registry being SO AWFUL and BAD, every other platform basically has the same thing. MacOS has the /Library/Preferences and ~/Library/Preferences hierarchies, with plist files inside of them representing individual keys and being accessible by a programmatic interface that abstracts the files away. This is the same as the Windows Registry aside from implementation details. On Linux, at least in the Gnome side of things, there's dconf, which is again exactly the same thing as the Windows Registry, and it even has a similar implementation: a binary database file. Amusingly, the dconf wikipedia article has a whole little section full of misleading and downright inaccurate ("Most Windows applications still store their user settings in individual .ini files spread across the disk") copes to obscure the fact that dconf is the same thing as the registry. All of this Windows hate is so tiresome. Bitter Slashdot-tier commentary from people who don't actually know anything about operating systems. I've noticed in particular that hobbyist Linux users think that they have a profound understanding of the OS because they used a command line and text editor to do system configuration instead of a GUI, and have to type arcane incantations from Google to fix their broken systems periodically. But in reality, they know very little. See, for example, any thread with hysterical complaints about systemd. They can't even explain what systemd is, what problems it solves, and why almost everyone who actually does linux system development for a living is pretty happy with it. But they're sure it's an evil conspiracy to steal the innocence of their precious OS. They think they know a lot, but they actually know nothing.

guessbest 4y ago

At least linux doesn't restart itself by default.

daemin 4y ago

Having Windows restart itself is a pet peeve of mine, but as long as you have Windows 10 Pro there are some local admin policies you can set to make sure it never restarts while you're logged in. This is the one key thing I do and it prevents Windows from restarting and losing your work.

password4321 4y ago
https://superuser.com/questions/1110265/how-to-prevent-windows-10-from-restarting-the-computer-after-installing-updates https://superuser.com/questions/1110265/how-to-prevent-windo... Reboot blocker utility https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19265417 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19265417 (Windows Home, etc.)

hguant 4y ago

Yeah, I used to get very pissy about everything in windows being stashed in the registry but...how is that different from everything being hidden inside systemd, or in a /etc/config file that is silently changed by services?

ayushnix 4y ago
> in a /etc/config file that is silently changed by services? I'm not really invested in the Windows vs Linux thing but config files in /etc never get silently changed or removed. If they are, it's a critical bug, although I've never really seen it happen. If there are any updates to the service files, they'll be installed alongside the original file. For example, on Arch Linux, it'll be /etc/systemd/journald.conf.pacnew while the original journald.conf file will never be touched.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  Debian based systems will change some config files on updates; I had a systemd customization that was overwritten out from under me, and I evntually found there was one place for apt to manage and a different for me to manage.
  - ayushnix 4y ago
    > Debian based systems will change some config files on updates; I had a systemd customization that was overwritten out from under me, and I evntually found there was one place for apt to manage and a different for me to manage. The only place where a package manager should overwrite changes is /usr. If you made any changes inside /usr, then yes, it'll be overwritten. A user isn't supposed to mess around inside /usr, unless there's a very good reason for it. There's /usr/local but it's better to just use $HOME/.local instead.
    - aidenn0 4y ago
      It's entirely possible it wasn't in /etc but somewhere else. This was a case of "I need to fix this urgently" and the first workaround I could find on stackoverflow suggested changing it in one place. After the problem came up again after an update I did a bit more digging to figure out where I could change it and apt would not overwrite it.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ulkesh 4y ago

> Use the tool that's best for your job. I don't bitch about my socket set being metric when I need SAE. At this point the differences are known and well understood. Completely agreed, and clearly the author of the article did not understand the differences before their endeavor, or they are trying to make a point -- one in which we all already know. One real strong opinion about Windows I have is the registry, which is at its core a flawed and archaic system. It tries to bring every setting and registered library into one single infrastructure and it has been the bane of developer existence for far too long. The registry needs to die. There is nothing the registry provides that can't be done simply within the sandbox of the application. And applications should be sandboxed. And don't get me started about NTFS. I find it odd, that the author, who claims they are coming from Linux doesn't complain about just how godawful slow NTFS is. To me this is the most egregious Windows issue. Sure, NTFS works, but when it takes 3-4 minutes to compile the same code on the same language/compiler in Windows that takes 30 seconds or less to compile in Linux, clearly something is wrong. I simply cannot develop on Windows -- efficiency is completely lost.

legalcorrection 4y ago
It's funny that with the registry being SO AWFUL and BAD, every other platform basically has the same thing. MacOS has the /Library/Preferences and ~/Library/Preferences hierarchies, with plist files inside of them representing individual keys and being accessible by a programmatic interface that abstracts the files away. This is the same as the Windows Registry aside from implementation details. On Linux, at least in the Gnome side of things, there's dconf, which is again exactly the same thing as the Windows Registry, and it even has a similar implementation: a binary database file. Amusingly, the dconf wikipedia article has a whole little section full of misleading and downright inaccurate ("Most Windows applications still store their user settings in individual .ini files spread across the disk") copes to obscure the fact that dconf is the same thing as the registry. All of this Windows hate is so tiresome. Bitter Slashdot-tier commentary from people who don't actually know anything about operating systems. I've noticed in particular that hobbyist Linux users think that they have a profound understanding of the OS because they used a command line and text editor to do system configuration instead of a GUI, and have to type arcane incantations from Google to fix their broken systems periodically. But in reality, they know very little. See, for example, any thread with hysterical complaints about systemd. They can't even explain what systemd is, what problems it solves, and why almost everyone who actually does linux system development for a living is pretty happy with it. But they're sure it's an evil conspiracy to steal the innocence of their precious OS. They think they know a lot, but they actually know nothing.