7 ms·

They call it "choice" I think /s

by lucsky 4y ago

pxc 4y ago
This but unironically. Use a different operating system if you want your vendor to tie you up and tell you what to do. Buy a pretty toaster if you want a slick appliance— not a computer. I'm sick of this complaint, which boils down to this: desktop Linux (taken collectively) isn't very much like a product for consumers by a vendor who wants to suck you into their ecosystem. Guess what? That's *what's good* about the Linux desktop. If you want a no-choice monoculture whose design better supports a thriving hellscape of proprietary crapware, you've got options already. If you want to be a consumer instead of a participant in a community and a tradition, go buy something.
- nibbleshifter 4y ago
  Exactly this. I don't know why some people seem to want a "one true desktop" monoculture. The whole reason I use Linux is because I get to make choices that make sense for me.
  - pxc 4y ago
    In fairness I think I do know what they want, which is better support from third-party (and especially proprietary) software vendors. A Linux workstation can be painfully close to perfectly usable for a lot of professionals who have various personal reasons to prefer it to Windows or macOS— reasons you and I would likely emphatically agree with, no less! There's this hope that if only for the fragmentation, Linux might finally have Photoshop or whatever. I get it. I've contended with integrating disparate GUI frameworks on my system. I appreciate what Apple's virtual monopoly on app frameworks for macOS allows them to do in terms of accessibility and integrations and UI changes, in rapid, uniform ways. But you can't impose uniformity on the Linux desktop without draining the oasis, without killing what makes it a breath of fresh air in the first place.
    - robinsonb5 4y ago
      I don't think it's even the UI that's the problem. The problem is this: > ./GuitarPro ./GuitarPro: error while loading shared libraries: libssl.so.0.9.8: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory I bought this program several years ago while using a Mint 13 system - it won't run on Mint 20. Maybe I could set up a Docker, or copy the correct version of the libraries, or whatever - maybe it could be coaxed into working, maybe not - but while end users are likely to encounter this kind of roadblock Linux is just a non-starter as a platform for commercial software.
      - nibbleshifter 4y ago
        Openssl specifically not providing a stable ABI is the bane of my fucking life. Many other libraries are similar. See: glibc... At least the kernel promises not to break user space. I guess because user space keeps fucking itself.
    - pmontra 4y ago
      > There's this hope that if only for the fragmentation, Linux might finally have Photoshop or whatever. If Adobe builds Photoshop for Red Hat and make it run only on Red Hat, people wanting to use Photoshop will install Red Hat. The big problem is what happens when Microsoft makes Excel work perfectly on Ubuntu and only on Ubuntu.
      - pxc 4y ago
        > The big problem is what happens when Microsoft makes Excel work perfectly on Ubuntu and only on Ubuntu. This is basically how Steam still works, pending the release of SteamOS 3.0, and it hasn't been a problem for other distros. They can sub in their own libs and repackage the thing or use an Ubuntu chroot. This is what Snap and Flatpak are for though, and I think they'll handle it well, going forward.
- spoiler 4y ago
  I actually agree with you, but I think that's not what people complain about. I think people mostly complain about a lack of cohesion that Windows/macOS have. But then again, their design language has recently started to be less cohesive too (or more precisely, mix of older and newer design systems are apparent). Like, it's generally difficult to get something working/looking nicely and consistently on Linux. A somewhat exception to this rule is GNOME, but even then there's issues with KDE/Qt app theming sometimes. Like, until 2021 (I think) I lived with a broken looking inkscape and Krita (used it as a hobby) because I gave up trying to figure out how to fix the theming, since none of the fixes suggested online worked. Then one day after some random update it started working So, there's a lot of space for improvement and better cross compatibility between these "subsystems" Granted, though, it's getting better. But I assume not at a pace an average user can perceive. So, i thinking that's where people get frustrated.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    The Windows ecosystem has never had a coherent design. I fondly remember the Windows 7 days where we had Windows Media Player, Windows Media Center, and Zune Media Player each with a completely different design style despite coming from the same company. Similarly, Outlook vs Windows Live Mail vs etc or Word Perfect vs Word. And these are just comparing similar Microsoft products.
    - spoiler 4y ago
      Ok I guess I've had a bit of a different perception back then, since thinking back I think you're rights. I guess the thing I was thinking of being cohesive were stuff like context menus, or integrating better with the window manager (or whatever it's called on Windows) than they do on Linux (since you had to integrate with the only existing one, not choose one). My earlier complaint about Krita/Inkscape is that most "labels" rendered in a colour and labels that was almost indistinguishable from the background, so I was largely working with shortcuts, or from memory and sometimes squinting to see what I'm clicking lol. It was an issue with all non-gnome apps, but I mostly used those two.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Hah, is there a middle-ground that likes choice in the Linux world without subscribing to the delusion that Mac/Windows ecosystems constitute anything a reasonable person might describe as "a thriving hellscape of proprietary crapware"? I'll buy/build a Linux desktop when we get quality hardware and software options (where "good hardware" means more than "fast CPU! big memory!"), but for now Mac is a pretty good experience. You can't hack around the source code for proprietary programs (I've pretty much never wanted to do this on any desktop system), but you can run open source alternatives for everything except maybe some core software.
  - pxc 4y ago
    > Hah, is there a middle-ground that likes choice in the Linux world without subscribing to the delusion that Mac/Windows ecosystems constitute anything a reasonable person might describe as "a thriving hellscape of proprietary crapware"? I realize I come off as extreme here, but that's really how I feel. I think that's an obviously fair way to describe the Microsoft Store and the Google Play Store. (Idk about iOS' App Store because I don't use iOS.) I'd also make the argument that it's a good way to describe the setup of basically any macOS power user, with their inevitable collection of brittle, mostly proprietary, solo dev apps they use to hack basic functionality back into Apple's anemic OS offering. (Windows suffers from that latter problem, too, though it's not as egregious as macOS.) > you can run open source alternatives for everything except maybe some core software. The core software is pretty much what we're talking about here: DEs and/or bundled apps. > for now Mac is a pretty good experience I understand that many people like it and I think their reasons for liking it are mostly good. But for me, using macOS is genuinely miserable, not just a little off. And I think the kind of app ecosystem that Mac people really love, of thoughfully designed, hidden gems by very small teams or individual devs, distributed as proprietary software for a small fee... is just not that great. To an extent that Mac lovers rarely admit or don't understand, a huge proportion of those apps exist only to compensate for Apple's own oversights, which wouldn't matter so much in an open ecosystem. The rest just aren't worth the cost of a closed ecosystem, in my opinion.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
- lucsky 4y ago
  Dude. Chill. That was just a mild joke. Who hurt you?
  - pxc 4y ago
    No anger towards you personally, just venting about what has apparently become a pet peeve for me :) (I actually liked your joke— even upvoted it before I wrote my rant lol. Sometimes you just gotta let it out!)
    - lucsky 4y ago
      Understood. I love venting too :D

They call it "choice" I think /s

by lucsky 4y ago

They call it "choice" I think /s

pxc 4y ago

This but unironically. Use a different operating system if you want your vendor to tie you up and tell you what to do. Buy a pretty toaster if you want a slick appliance— not a computer. I'm sick of this complaint, which boils down to this: desktop Linux (taken collectively) isn't very much like a product for consumers by a vendor who wants to suck you into their ecosystem. Guess what? That's *what's good* about the Linux desktop. If you want a no-choice monoculture whose design better supports a thriving hellscape of proprietary crapware, you've got options already. If you want to be a consumer instead of a participant in a community and a tradition, go buy something.

nibbleshifter 4y ago
Exactly this. I don't know why some people seem to want a "one true desktop" monoculture. The whole reason I use Linux is because I get to make choices that make sense for me.
- pxc 4y ago
  In fairness I think I do know what they want, which is better support from third-party (and especially proprietary) software vendors. A Linux workstation can be painfully close to perfectly usable for a lot of professionals who have various personal reasons to prefer it to Windows or macOS— reasons you and I would likely emphatically agree with, no less! There's this hope that if only for the fragmentation, Linux might finally have Photoshop or whatever. I get it. I've contended with integrating disparate GUI frameworks on my system. I appreciate what Apple's virtual monopoly on app frameworks for macOS allows them to do in terms of accessibility and integrations and UI changes, in rapid, uniform ways. But you can't impose uniformity on the Linux desktop without draining the oasis, without killing what makes it a breath of fresh air in the first place.
  - robinsonb5 4y ago
    I don't think it's even the UI that's the problem. The problem is this: > ./GuitarPro ./GuitarPro: error while loading shared libraries: libssl.so.0.9.8: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory I bought this program several years ago while using a Mint 13 system - it won't run on Mint 20. Maybe I could set up a Docker, or copy the correct version of the libraries, or whatever - maybe it could be coaxed into working, maybe not - but while end users are likely to encounter this kind of roadblock Linux is just a non-starter as a platform for commercial software.
    - nibbleshifter 4y ago
      Openssl specifically not providing a stable ABI is the bane of my fucking life. Many other libraries are similar. See: glibc... At least the kernel promises not to break user space. I guess because user space keeps fucking itself.
  - pmontra 4y ago
    > There's this hope that if only for the fragmentation, Linux might finally have Photoshop or whatever. If Adobe builds Photoshop for Red Hat and make it run only on Red Hat, people wanting to use Photoshop will install Red Hat. The big problem is what happens when Microsoft makes Excel work perfectly on Ubuntu and only on Ubuntu.
    - pxc 4y ago
      > The big problem is what happens when Microsoft makes Excel work perfectly on Ubuntu and only on Ubuntu. This is basically how Steam still works, pending the release of SteamOS 3.0, and it hasn't been a problem for other distros. They can sub in their own libs and repackage the thing or use an Ubuntu chroot. This is what Snap and Flatpak are for though, and I think they'll handle it well, going forward.
spoiler 4y ago
I actually agree with you, but I think that's not what people complain about. I think people mostly complain about a lack of cohesion that Windows/macOS have. But then again, their design language has recently started to be less cohesive too (or more precisely, mix of older and newer design systems are apparent). Like, it's generally difficult to get something working/looking nicely and consistently on Linux. A somewhat exception to this rule is GNOME, but even then there's issues with KDE/Qt app theming sometimes. Like, until 2021 (I think) I lived with a broken looking inkscape and Krita (used it as a hobby) because I gave up trying to figure out how to fix the theming, since none of the fixes suggested online worked. Then one day after some random update it started working So, there's a lot of space for improvement and better cross compatibility between these "subsystems" Granted, though, it's getting better. But I assume not at a pace an average user can perceive. So, i thinking that's where people get frustrated.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  The Windows ecosystem has never had a coherent design. I fondly remember the Windows 7 days where we had Windows Media Player, Windows Media Center, and Zune Media Player each with a completely different design style despite coming from the same company. Similarly, Outlook vs Windows Live Mail vs etc or Word Perfect vs Word. And these are just comparing similar Microsoft products.
  - spoiler 4y ago
    Ok I guess I've had a bit of a different perception back then, since thinking back I think you're rights. I guess the thing I was thinking of being cohesive were stuff like context menus, or integrating better with the window manager (or whatever it's called on Windows) than they do on Linux (since you had to integrate with the only existing one, not choose one). My earlier complaint about Krita/Inkscape is that most "labels" rendered in a colour and labels that was almost indistinguishable from the background, so I was largely working with shortcuts, or from memory and sometimes squinting to see what I'm clicking lol. It was an issue with all non-gnome apps, but I mostly used those two.
throwaway894345 4y ago
Hah, is there a middle-ground that likes choice in the Linux world without subscribing to the delusion that Mac/Windows ecosystems constitute anything a reasonable person might describe as "a thriving hellscape of proprietary crapware"? I'll buy/build a Linux desktop when we get quality hardware and software options (where "good hardware" means more than "fast CPU! big memory!"), but for now Mac is a pretty good experience. You can't hack around the source code for proprietary programs (I've pretty much never wanted to do this on any desktop system), but you can run open source alternatives for everything except maybe some core software.
- pxc 4y ago
  > Hah, is there a middle-ground that likes choice in the Linux world without subscribing to the delusion that Mac/Windows ecosystems constitute anything a reasonable person might describe as "a thriving hellscape of proprietary crapware"? I realize I come off as extreme here, but that's really how I feel. I think that's an obviously fair way to describe the Microsoft Store and the Google Play Store. (Idk about iOS' App Store because I don't use iOS.) I'd also make the argument that it's a good way to describe the setup of basically any macOS power user, with their inevitable collection of brittle, mostly proprietary, solo dev apps they use to hack basic functionality back into Apple's anemic OS offering. (Windows suffers from that latter problem, too, though it's not as egregious as macOS.) > you can run open source alternatives for everything except maybe some core software. The core software is pretty much what we're talking about here: DEs and/or bundled apps. > for now Mac is a pretty good experience I understand that many people like it and I think their reasons for liking it are mostly good. But for me, using macOS is genuinely miserable, not just a little off. And I think the kind of app ecosystem that Mac people really love, of thoughfully designed, hidden gems by very small teams or individual devs, distributed as proprietary software for a small fee... is just not that great. To an extent that Mac lovers rarely admit or don't understand, a huge proportion of those apps exist only to compensate for Apple's own oversights, which wouldn't matter so much in an open ecosystem. The rest just aren't worth the cost of a closed ecosystem, in my opinion.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
lucsky 4y ago
Dude. Chill. That was just a mild joke. Who hurt you?
- pxc 4y ago
  No anger towards you personally, just venting about what has apparently become a pet peeve for me :) (I actually liked your joke— even upvoted it before I wrote my rant lol. Sometimes you just gotta let it out!)
  - lucsky 4y ago
    Understood. I love venting too :D