3 ms·
Hoo boy, there is a lot to unpack here. - Lack of API/ABI stability in the kernel: Chasing a moving target is no fun, exhausting even, but it would be a lot e
by mbakke 4y ago
Hoo boy, there is a lot to unpack here.
- Lack of API/ABI stability in the kernel:
Chasing a moving target is no fun, exhausting even, but it would be a lot easier to just upstream the driver. The article fails to mention that AMD did just that and have vastly better UX than Nvidia.
- No GUI for multi user audio device sharing:
It sucks to have to use a terminal and read a manual so you can listen to music while your brother is on YouTube (somehow), but at least you may learn a useful skill.
- lack of support for some printers/scanners/peripherals:
Obviously things take time if the company offers no official support; volunteers only implement what they need to move on with their life. Generally if a printer is supported on macOS it should work on GNU/Linux due to sharing the underlying framework (CUPS).
- Power management:
While Linux have had its issues, things are vastly improved nowadays, to the point I suspect it's better than Windows on most hardware (but I have no personal experience).
- X.org/Wayland:
No excuses here. X.org is a hot mess of legacy garbage, and Wayland is not all it was hyped to be, with some equally brain-damaged design choices. I think once Wayland becomes the new normal transitioning to other display servers get easier due to simpler APIs than Xorg (I'm sorry for everyone who had to endure that in their lives).
- Fonts:
Still a mess, but improving rapidly.
- kernel difficult to debug:
Is Mach or NT really better in this area? At least Linux is completely open and has a gazillion knobs that you can tweak.
- Linux kernel code is low quality:
It's got some ugly interfaces and warts, like most hugely complex organically grown software projects, but that doesn't mean the code is poor quality.
- Low-memory conditions:
The kernel will still become unresponsive when running low on memory, but there are user-space workarounds for that (as mentioned in the article, I agree that earlyoom should be default).
- anti-cheat protections fail to work:
I personally do not want software making changes on my machine without my explicit consent. This is a feature IMO.
- Money, enthusiasm, motivation and responsibility:
I adore the diversity and creativity in FOSS. Many, perhaps most developers are doing it from passion instead of greedy interests. If you care about a particular project or feature, they will likely be happy to accept donations.
Hope this did not sound too condescending. I am grateful posts like these exists giving everyone a chance to straighten their priorities.
- adrian_b 4y ago"Fonts" This complaint has nothing to do with Linux. If you copy the Windows fonts or the MacOS font to a Linux computer, they will work as well as on the original systems. I have stopped using my Apple laptop many years ago, but I am still using on Linux a typeface kept from the Apple laptop, i.e. Hiragino Mincho Pro, because I have not found yet a better Japanese typeface. The problem with fonts is that the free fonts used to be very ugly, so the default Linux installations were also ugly. Now there are a few high-quality free fonts and everyone who wants better fonts can choose to buy good fonts from the many online stores. For me, the quality of the typefaces is an extremely important part of a computer experience. I would not pay money for Windows, because it does not offer any feature that is useful for me, but I have bought a large number of beautiful typefaces and I use them on my Linux desktops and laptops, instead of the default fonts provided by most Linux distributions. So my Linux documents look even better than any documents using the default Windows or MacOS fonts. The quality of the fonts has nothing to do with the operating system but only with what you are willing to spend. When spending money on Windows or MacOS a part goes to the included fonts, so it is expected that those must be better than free fonts.