4 ms·

The reason app developers think it's fine to dump them in $HOME is because Linux hides them. Those app developers do not bother hiding them on Windows. The spec

The reason app developers think it's fine to dump them in $HOME is because Linux hides them. Those app developers do not bother hiding them on Windows. The specific functionality being used does not 'work just fine everywhere'. It is not the case that Linux functionality is How Computing Works with every deviation being 'out of the way', not even in a hypothetical world where Linux isn't the drastic minority of machines by an order of magnitude.

matheusmoreira 4y ago
> Linux hides them Linux doesn't hide anything. It's POSIX and GNU programs that choose not show anything that starts with a dot by default. As far as Linux is concerned they're just normal files on the file system. It doesn't have to be that way. Personally I have my system configured so that all "hidden" files are shown because I hate the concept of hidden anything. I used to do this in Windows too. > The specific functionality being used does not 'work just fine everywhere'. It kind of does. "Program reads configuration from a file" seems like a really basic thing that every operating system supports. There really is no need to directly depend on any Windows API stuff. Even worse would be suggesting the use of the registry. > It is not the case that Linux functionality is How Computing Works with every deviation being 'out of the way', not even in a hypothetical world where Linux isn't the drastic minority of machines by an order of magnitude. And yet Windows is the system getting "half-baked ports of Unix-first software" here. Why should the developers be shamed for not going of their way to support Windows conventions for Unix software? People develop software on and for the systems they actually care about. Windows is the legacy proprietary system people only support because it gets them paid. At least I hope someone got paid to port ssh to Windows because I sure wouldn't want to do it otherwise.
- delta_p_delta_x 4y ago
  > Even worse would be suggesting the use of the registry. I would actually argue otherwise: the registry is the perfect place to put configuration data, provided Microsoft's guidelines[0] on registry key creation/deletion and hive use are followed. I would argue every OS should have its own 'registry' for a universal location to set configuration for programs. On the other hand, if every application has its own configuration file, then every application shall have its own configuration file parsing/serialising/deserialising routine. It's also what has led to this explosion of 'config file formats': .json, .yaml, .ini, .conf, .cfg, .toml, .xml. I guess this is why people dislike systemd so much: it reminds them too much of Windows. [0]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/sysinfo/registry https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/sysinfo/regi... You appear to have an attitude of UNIX/Linux > Windows, which is unfortunate. The two OS families are different, but I personally believe neither is superior to the other. Both OSs suck in their own ways, both OSs are better in their own ways (this conclusion after using Windows and Linux both on a 70:30 time ratio). Windows is in every way as modern an OS as Linux is, but just like Linux, has inherited strange baggage from its 40-year-old past, like 'a file cannot have COM in its name'.
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    > the registry is the perfect place to put configuration data, provided Microsoft's guidelines[0] on registry key creation/deletion and hive use are followed Few people follow that stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft's own people didn't follow that stuff. The result is of course a mess that users have to clean up with software like CCleaner or whatever people use these days. It sucks even if those guidelines are followed. Configuration is data and belongs to the users. I know people who really like portable applications that they can keep on a USB drive and use anywhere and this registry bullshit breaks that. > I would argue every OS should have its own 'registry' for a universal location to set configuration for programs. And I would argue otherwise. The Windows registry is essentially a poor excuse for a proper file system. I think at least one Linux desktop environment tried to reinvent this crap and it sucked just as hard. > every application shall have its own configuration file parsing/serialising/deserialising routine The Windows registry values are essentially memory dumps of C types. It's perfectly possible to simply dump raw bytes into binary files on Linux too if you don't care about stuff like endianness. The result would be strictly superior to the Windows registry because the files are being stored in a real file system. > I guess this is why people dislike systemd so much: it reminds them too much of Windows. I like systemd.
- pie_flavor 4y ago
  > Windows is the legacy proprietary system people only support because it gets them paid. Windows is the system everyone actually uses - even developers!. I write software because I care about people using it. > Why should the developers be shamed for not going of their way to support Windows conventions for Unix software? Because it's wrong on Unix, and even wrong on Linux, and once you are doing the right thing on Linux it is no longer out of your way.
wruza 4y ago
Regular windows users do not visit $HOME often either. They work mostly in Desktop, Documents and Downloads. They can’t even “go up” from these anymore for more than a decade. None of the non-tech users I know would even understand me if I told them to look at their homedir. So yeah, it’s fine regardless. Btw, many native, no-linux windows apps, including Microsoft ones love to create their bs folders like “My Games”, “Microsoft Visual Studio (c)(tm) <yearname> Pile of Whatever” or “Android Projects” right in ~/Documents. This “way” is unenforceable even in OS’es own company.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

matheusmoreira 4y ago

> Linux hides them Linux doesn't hide anything. It's POSIX and GNU programs that choose not show anything that starts with a dot by default. As far as Linux is concerned they're just normal files on the file system. It doesn't have to be that way. Personally I have my system configured so that all "hidden" files are shown because I hate the concept of hidden anything. I used to do this in Windows too. > The specific functionality being used does not 'work just fine everywhere'. It kind of does. "Program reads configuration from a file" seems like a really basic thing that every operating system supports. There really is no need to directly depend on any Windows API stuff. Even worse would be suggesting the use of the registry. > It is not the case that Linux functionality is How Computing Works with every deviation being 'out of the way', not even in a hypothetical world where Linux isn't the drastic minority of machines by an order of magnitude. And yet Windows is the system getting "half-baked ports of Unix-first software" here. Why should the developers be shamed for not going of their way to support Windows conventions for Unix software? People develop software on and for the systems they actually care about. Windows is the legacy proprietary system people only support because it gets them paid. At least I hope someone got paid to port ssh to Windows because I sure wouldn't want to do it otherwise.

delta_p_delta_x 4y ago
> Even worse would be suggesting the use of the registry. I would actually argue otherwise: the registry is the perfect place to put configuration data, provided Microsoft's guidelines[0] on registry key creation/deletion and hive use are followed. I would argue every OS should have its own 'registry' for a universal location to set configuration for programs. On the other hand, if every application has its own configuration file, then every application shall have its own configuration file parsing/serialising/deserialising routine. It's also what has led to this explosion of 'config file formats': .json, .yaml, .ini, .conf, .cfg, .toml, .xml. I guess this is why people dislike systemd so much: it reminds them too much of Windows. [0]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/sysinfo/registry https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/sysinfo/regi... You appear to have an attitude of UNIX/Linux > Windows, which is unfortunate. The two OS families are different, but I personally believe neither is superior to the other. Both OSs suck in their own ways, both OSs are better in their own ways (this conclusion after using Windows and Linux both on a 70:30 time ratio). Windows is in every way as modern an OS as Linux is, but just like Linux, has inherited strange baggage from its 40-year-old past, like 'a file cannot have COM in its name'.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > the registry is the perfect place to put configuration data, provided Microsoft's guidelines[0] on registry key creation/deletion and hive use are followed Few people follow that stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft's own people didn't follow that stuff. The result is of course a mess that users have to clean up with software like CCleaner or whatever people use these days. It sucks even if those guidelines are followed. Configuration is data and belongs to the users. I know people who really like portable applications that they can keep on a USB drive and use anywhere and this registry bullshit breaks that. > I would argue every OS should have its own 'registry' for a universal location to set configuration for programs. And I would argue otherwise. The Windows registry is essentially a poor excuse for a proper file system. I think at least one Linux desktop environment tried to reinvent this crap and it sucked just as hard. > every application shall have its own configuration file parsing/serialising/deserialising routine The Windows registry values are essentially memory dumps of C types. It's perfectly possible to simply dump raw bytes into binary files on Linux too if you don't care about stuff like endianness. The result would be strictly superior to the Windows registry because the files are being stored in a real file system. > I guess this is why people dislike systemd so much: it reminds them too much of Windows. I like systemd.
pie_flavor 4y ago
> Windows is the legacy proprietary system people only support because it gets them paid. Windows is the system everyone actually uses - even developers!. I write software because I care about people using it. > Why should the developers be shamed for not going of their way to support Windows conventions for Unix software? Because it's wrong on Unix, and even wrong on Linux, and once you are doing the right thing on Linux it is no longer out of your way.

wruza 4y ago

Regular windows users do not visit $HOME often either. They work mostly in Desktop, Documents and Downloads. They can’t even “go up” from these anymore for more than a decade. None of the non-tech users I know would even understand me if I told them to look at their homedir. So yeah, it’s fine regardless. Btw, many native, no-linux windows apps, including Microsoft ones love to create their bs folders like “My Games”, “Microsoft Visual Studio (c)(tm) <yearname> Pile of Whatever” or “Android Projects” right in ~/Documents. This “way” is unenforceable even in OS’es own company.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]