5 ms·

I haven't noticed this. I am negative about linux on desktop because it has been a major disappoinment every time I try it. Last two attempts - ever since I'v

I haven't noticed this. I am negative about linux on desktop because it has been a major disappoinment every time I try it. Last two attempts - ever since I've built my 5900x desktop last summer I can't even get fedora to boot from stick without freezing. I don't have the energy to deal with such issues anymore - I've spent years rebuilding custom drivers, dealing with upgrade breaking my system, etc. Same desktop - windows just works - needed to download a few drivers manually - other than that - plug and play. And MacOS is next level in that regard. I dislike Windows choices very much but Linux desktop is just not an option if you want low maintenance/streamlined experience.

Zhyl 4y ago
Your comment here is pretty typical of a medium grade HN response. That is to say: * Thorough and well thought through. Well written (unlike, say, Reddit) * Polite, doesn't attack the person you're responding to or represent their position as ridiculous However * Entirely rooted in personal experience and often missing the broader point or use case being described in OP. In this case I can see that you're describing why you yourself are negative on the Linux desktop (which is on topic), but responses like this miss the context of Steam Deck, Proton and imply that the issues found are never going to improve, to the point you are writing off the whole concept of a Linux platform for all use cases. On HN this seems to appear a lot and is used very often to stifle tangential discussions. A thread about how many games now run on Proton will have at least one and likely many people writing a list of all the technical issues they've had with Linux recently and then either explicitly or implicitly saying that as a result Linux is not ready or not suitable for case stated in the article.
- moonchrome 4y ago
  But steam deck is not a desktop - it's a console. Linux on the desktop usually means a Windows replacement - historically, and the most relevant meaning to me personally. The reason I'm not hopeful things will improve is same as always - not enough critical mass to get the momentum going. I was buying a PCIe wifi card a few months ago and wanted to check support for Linux in case I try again. There were zero options locally where I could reliably determine that onboard BT would work, and there were like 5 modern cards available. I just don't see what commercial entity is going to push Linux desktop development ? Linux server is mostly a result of big players working together to commoditize the OS, scaling with commercial os on the backed would get prohibitively expensive immediately. Don't see where the desktop push will come from.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    Deck seems like a desktop to me. Has x86 hardware, all the same ports as the venerable Macbook Pro and a nice beefy GPU built-into the machine. If the Deck ships with KDE installed and accessible in the settings, I think it's safe to call it a desktop.
  - jcelerier 4y ago
    idk looks pretty desktop-y to me: https://youtu.be/PxLB5khCmGo?t=422 https://youtu.be/PxLB5khCmGo?t=422
    - wankle 4y ago
      I'm not into consoles but if I were, that video would encourage me to get the steam deck.
  - Zhyl 4y ago
    The Steam Deck is a full PC that boots into a console UI. You can switch it into desktop mode which uses KDE - a very popular desktop environment. You can dock the Stem Deck using a USB-C hub to connect to a monitor, keyboard and mouse. This is a use case that is supported by Valve and Valve sells a first party docking station to facilitate this. There have been multiple people citing on the Steam Deck subreddit that they regularly use the Steam Deck in this way and a few even saying they use it as their daily driver. It's a laptop in a handheld form factor. That is all.
  - Zhyl 4y ago
    It looks like you edited your comment to expand, so I'll address the new points separately. I think the first thing to note is going back to my OP in that I simply don't understand why people like yourself will go to such lengths to argue against Linux desktop, citing all the issues you've had with it when I don't see this kind of kick back against any other technology or even any other concept more widely. If people don't like something or don't think it'll work they'll either ignore the thread or post a much shorter response expressing doubts. I think the only thing that I saw get to a similar stage was crypto, but it seems like the crypto community split off into their own little world whereas the Linux communities still stay in a fairly close orbit to technical circles. I think secondly this speaks to another comment I made elsewhere where the counter-arguments for Linux desktop are firmly rooted in personal experience. Here you're also explicitly saying that the issues you're having you don't think are going to improve. But Linux had improved. It's improved massively in the last 5-10 years. 2 years ago I couldn't play Apex Legends. 5 years ago I couldn't play Direct X games without a lot of effort. 10 years ago I couldn't get YouTube or Netflix. Things are improving and whilst your personal opinion may still be that Linux still won't be viable, the sheer number of people that comment in a similar vain means that there is a negative smog around Linux that stops or discourages more positive discussion.
- ratsmack 4y ago
  Most people never mention the hardware issue in regards to installing a successful Linux desktop. The expectation that all hardware combinations will just work is a little bit optimistic. I've run Linux desktops ever since X11 was available, but I always research the hardware aspect prior to installing a distribution and have always had a good experience (not perfect, but good).
xorcist 4y ago
> rebuilding custom drivers, dealing with upgrade breaking my system If you compile custom drivers for your operating system, then maybe it breaking at some future upgrade shouldn't come as a great surprise? Presumably you know what you're doing and find these things fun and rewarding in their own right.
le-mark 4y ago
> ever since I've built my 5900x desktop last summer As someone who’s been using Ubuntu exclusively since 2008, this comment is bizarre. The pain point with pcs has always been compatibility and driver support. The Microsoft miracle was ubiquitous vendor support they enforced with their monopoly. Apple handles this by tightly controlling hardware and peripherals. Linux being the odd man out has always suffered. The result of this dynamic has always been that Linux is best on previous generation hardware. So the question for the parent is; did you check support for the components used in your custom build? By explaining the history, I hope this question is received in a non hostile manner by the reader. Maybe this advice or reality is lost today I don’t know. I find it to be annoying that many don’t know. Related to the way many dismiss the Linux desktop because they can’t use photoshop or application of choice; when cross platform apps have always been the exception.
- carlosjobim 4y ago
  How hard is it to build a working hackintosh system compared to making a useful Linux install? I've tried Linux a few times over the years (including last year), and every time had to dig deep into terminal commands, tutorials and config files to make basic OS functionality work. If that's what you have to do, maybe it's less of a hassle to build/install a hackintosh system.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    This is so alien to me. I've got linux on half a dozen machines around the house, and all I do to install is decide whether to use ubuntu or debian, then run the install and get a working system spat out in little time. Hackintoshes require a lot of thought and preparation and things like (for example) nvidia graphics cannot work, and intel wifi is problematic (I see there is an alpha driver now). What "basic OS functionality" are you talking about that needs terminal commands, tutorials and config files?
    - le-mark 4y ago
      > This is so alien to me. Indeed, it’s FUD as if sent by bots from Balmers time, that are still running, inexplicably.

Zhyl 4y ago

Your comment here is pretty typical of a medium grade HN response. That is to say: * Thorough and well thought through. Well written (unlike, say, Reddit) * Polite, doesn't attack the person you're responding to or represent their position as ridiculous However * Entirely rooted in personal experience and often missing the broader point or use case being described in OP. In this case I can see that you're describing why you yourself are negative on the Linux desktop (which is on topic), but responses like this miss the context of Steam Deck, Proton and imply that the issues found are never going to improve, to the point you are writing off the whole concept of a Linux platform for all use cases. On HN this seems to appear a lot and is used very often to stifle tangential discussions. A thread about how many games now run on Proton will have at least one and likely many people writing a list of all the technical issues they've had with Linux recently and then either explicitly or implicitly saying that as a result Linux is not ready or not suitable for case stated in the article.

moonchrome 4y ago
But steam deck is not a desktop - it's a console. Linux on the desktop usually means a Windows replacement - historically, and the most relevant meaning to me personally. The reason I'm not hopeful things will improve is same as always - not enough critical mass to get the momentum going. I was buying a PCIe wifi card a few months ago and wanted to check support for Linux in case I try again. There were zero options locally where I could reliably determine that onboard BT would work, and there were like 5 modern cards available. I just don't see what commercial entity is going to push Linux desktop development ? Linux server is mostly a result of big players working together to commoditize the OS, scaling with commercial os on the backed would get prohibitively expensive immediately. Don't see where the desktop push will come from.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Deck seems like a desktop to me. Has x86 hardware, all the same ports as the venerable Macbook Pro and a nice beefy GPU built-into the machine. If the Deck ships with KDE installed and accessible in the settings, I think it's safe to call it a desktop.
- jcelerier 4y ago
  idk looks pretty desktop-y to me: https://youtu.be/PxLB5khCmGo?t=422 https://youtu.be/PxLB5khCmGo?t=422
  - wankle 4y ago
    I'm not into consoles but if I were, that video would encourage me to get the steam deck.
- Zhyl 4y ago
  The Steam Deck is a full PC that boots into a console UI. You can switch it into desktop mode which uses KDE - a very popular desktop environment. You can dock the Stem Deck using a USB-C hub to connect to a monitor, keyboard and mouse. This is a use case that is supported by Valve and Valve sells a first party docking station to facilitate this. There have been multiple people citing on the Steam Deck subreddit that they regularly use the Steam Deck in this way and a few even saying they use it as their daily driver. It's a laptop in a handheld form factor. That is all.
- Zhyl 4y ago
  It looks like you edited your comment to expand, so I'll address the new points separately. I think the first thing to note is going back to my OP in that I simply don't understand why people like yourself will go to such lengths to argue against Linux desktop, citing all the issues you've had with it when I don't see this kind of kick back against any other technology or even any other concept more widely. If people don't like something or don't think it'll work they'll either ignore the thread or post a much shorter response expressing doubts. I think the only thing that I saw get to a similar stage was crypto, but it seems like the crypto community split off into their own little world whereas the Linux communities still stay in a fairly close orbit to technical circles. I think secondly this speaks to another comment I made elsewhere where the counter-arguments for Linux desktop are firmly rooted in personal experience. Here you're also explicitly saying that the issues you're having you don't think are going to improve. But Linux had improved. It's improved massively in the last 5-10 years. 2 years ago I couldn't play Apex Legends. 5 years ago I couldn't play Direct X games without a lot of effort. 10 years ago I couldn't get YouTube or Netflix. Things are improving and whilst your personal opinion may still be that Linux still won't be viable, the sheer number of people that comment in a similar vain means that there is a negative smog around Linux that stops or discourages more positive discussion.
ratsmack 4y ago
Most people never mention the hardware issue in regards to installing a successful Linux desktop. The expectation that all hardware combinations will just work is a little bit optimistic. I've run Linux desktops ever since X11 was available, but I always research the hardware aspect prior to installing a distribution and have always had a good experience (not perfect, but good).

xorcist 4y ago

> rebuilding custom drivers, dealing with upgrade breaking my system If you compile custom drivers for your operating system, then maybe it breaking at some future upgrade shouldn't come as a great surprise? Presumably you know what you're doing and find these things fun and rewarding in their own right.

le-mark 4y ago

> ever since I've built my 5900x desktop last summer As someone who’s been using Ubuntu exclusively since 2008, this comment is bizarre. The pain point with pcs has always been compatibility and driver support. The Microsoft miracle was ubiquitous vendor support they enforced with their monopoly. Apple handles this by tightly controlling hardware and peripherals. Linux being the odd man out has always suffered. The result of this dynamic has always been that Linux is best on previous generation hardware. So the question for the parent is; did you check support for the components used in your custom build? By explaining the history, I hope this question is received in a non hostile manner by the reader. Maybe this advice or reality is lost today I don’t know. I find it to be annoying that many don’t know. Related to the way many dismiss the Linux desktop because they can’t use photoshop or application of choice; when cross platform apps have always been the exception.

carlosjobim 4y ago
How hard is it to build a working hackintosh system compared to making a useful Linux install? I've tried Linux a few times over the years (including last year), and every time had to dig deep into terminal commands, tutorials and config files to make basic OS functionality work. If that's what you have to do, maybe it's less of a hassle to build/install a hackintosh system.
- Nursie 4y ago
  This is so alien to me. I've got linux on half a dozen machines around the house, and all I do to install is decide whether to use ubuntu or debian, then run the install and get a working system spat out in little time. Hackintoshes require a lot of thought and preparation and things like (for example) nvidia graphics cannot work, and intel wifi is problematic (I see there is an alpha driver now). What "basic OS functionality" are you talking about that needs terminal commands, tutorials and config files?
  - le-mark 4y ago
    > This is so alien to me. Indeed, it’s FUD as if sent by bots from Balmers time, that are still running, inexplicably.