5 ms·

Yeah this is why I don't use Linux on the desktop. 25 years of trying and at least once every 6 months something stops working completely or doesn't work out of

by baz00 3y ago

Yeah this is why I don't use Linux on the desktop. 25 years of trying and at least once every 6 months something stops working completely or doesn't work out of the box properly. I gave up.

prmoustache 3y ago
Nah, only when wanting to use exotic hardware/software that is not supported by the vendor. The article author wouldn't have had this issue with a wacom.
- baz00 3y ago
  I have those issues with power management and graphics drivers on stock Intel machines. The real problem is the kernel QA is shite and the vendor packaging QA is shite. Microsoft are actually orders of magnitude better and that's saying something.
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    I don't know. My professional laptop on windows decided one day to only discover (or not) randomly the external monitors connected to my usb-c dock (same manufacturer as laptop). If I am booting on windows, every time I boot it is like rolling a dice to know if my screens will show something. Do not happen on Linux on same laptop. So I would say you have rose tinted glasses when using windows or just got lucky with it and unlucky with linux.
- d3w4s9 3y ago
  "not supported by the vendor" I'd say you probably should think about it the other way -- you only get decent Linux desktop experience if everything is supported by the vendor. Just look up on HN what kind of trouble people run into when installing a Linux distro on their laptop. People go as far as recommending very specific models from certain brands because everything works as expected on those laptops.
  - vkazanov 3y ago
    But isn't this how things work in Windows and Mac lands? There are vendors that do hardware support. There are not too many linux-based vendors. And linux still works on 80% of unsupported machines. I go for linux dells. Mostly OK. Certainly better than what I had back in darker Windows times.
d3w4s9 3y ago
Agreed. Here is a list of things I ran into in my past attempts to use Linux as a daily driver: * random errors coming out of nowhere on Linux after a refresh installation + package update * IME not working (Asian language) * IME providing very low quality suggestions leading to slower typing speed * scaling issues (fractional scaling) * random freezing on gnome * No sound from speaker on a laptop (driver issues) * issues with connecting to 802.1x wifi (in a certain distribution, was able to get around via command line) * not being able to find one decent pomodoro app -- the one in the Ubuntu store doesn't work, like, at all * window management is way behind Windows That's what I can think of right now, but if I spend more time I can come up with 30 more. Windows and Mac have their fair share of bugs, limitations and weirdness, but nowhere nearly as bad as this.
AtlasBarfed 3y ago
It's really a failure of vision by hardware makers. Intel especially should have aggressively backed Linux Desktop because: 1) it would have helped invert the subservient position they had with Microsoft in general 2) would have allowed Intel to push out an demonstrate hardware features in an OS without waiting for Microsoft to support it two years down the line in some service pack 3) probably would have kept them up with consumer hardware and the smartphone thing wouldn't have blindsided them 4) probably enabled them to get more of their peripherals businesses (which they constantly acquire and shed) 5) enabled cheaper low end devices where the Microsoft tax is a quite large percentage of the device cost 6) would have enabled them to be in the ARM game if they wanted to, IoT with Atom processors, and tons of other markets Qualcomm or some other ARM vendor should have done it to 1) have a real alternative to google controlled Android 2) get ARM out to more consumer devices 3) get their hardware features demonstrated more quickly Google should have done it (yeah ChromeOS sucks)...... well, we I'm shocked ChromeOS hasn't been dropped yet and Google would never have stuck with it. But none of that matters now, it should have been done 20 years ago. And Apple seems to be the only hardware company that does software well.

by baz00 3y ago

Yeah this is why I don't use Linux on the desktop. 25 years of trying and at least once every 6 months something stops working completely or doesn't work out of the box properly. I gave up.

prmoustache 3y ago

Nah, only when wanting to use exotic hardware/software that is not supported by the vendor. The article author wouldn't have had this issue with a wacom.

baz00 3y ago
I have those issues with power management and graphics drivers on stock Intel machines. The real problem is the kernel QA is shite and the vendor packaging QA is shite. Microsoft are actually orders of magnitude better and that's saying something.
- prmoustache 3y ago
  I don't know. My professional laptop on windows decided one day to only discover (or not) randomly the external monitors connected to my usb-c dock (same manufacturer as laptop). If I am booting on windows, every time I boot it is like rolling a dice to know if my screens will show something. Do not happen on Linux on same laptop. So I would say you have rose tinted glasses when using windows or just got lucky with it and unlucky with linux.
d3w4s9 3y ago
"not supported by the vendor" I'd say you probably should think about it the other way -- you only get decent Linux desktop experience if everything is supported by the vendor. Just look up on HN what kind of trouble people run into when installing a Linux distro on their laptop. People go as far as recommending very specific models from certain brands because everything works as expected on those laptops.
- vkazanov 3y ago
  But isn't this how things work in Windows and Mac lands? There are vendors that do hardware support. There are not too many linux-based vendors. And linux still works on 80% of unsupported machines. I go for linux dells. Mostly OK. Certainly better than what I had back in darker Windows times.

d3w4s9 3y ago

Agreed. Here is a list of things I ran into in my past attempts to use Linux as a daily driver: * random errors coming out of nowhere on Linux after a refresh installation + package update * IME not working (Asian language) * IME providing very low quality suggestions leading to slower typing speed * scaling issues (fractional scaling) * random freezing on gnome * No sound from speaker on a laptop (driver issues) * issues with connecting to 802.1x wifi (in a certain distribution, was able to get around via command line) * not being able to find one decent pomodoro app -- the one in the Ubuntu store doesn't work, like, at all * window management is way behind Windows That's what I can think of right now, but if I spend more time I can come up with 30 more. Windows and Mac have their fair share of bugs, limitations and weirdness, but nowhere nearly as bad as this.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

It's really a failure of vision by hardware makers. Intel especially should have aggressively backed Linux Desktop because: 1) it would have helped invert the subservient position they had with Microsoft in general 2) would have allowed Intel to push out an demonstrate hardware features in an OS without waiting for Microsoft to support it two years down the line in some service pack 3) probably would have kept them up with consumer hardware and the smartphone thing wouldn't have blindsided them 4) probably enabled them to get more of their peripherals businesses (which they constantly acquire and shed) 5) enabled cheaper low end devices where the Microsoft tax is a quite large percentage of the device cost 6) would have enabled them to be in the ARM game if they wanted to, IoT with Atom processors, and tons of other markets Qualcomm or some other ARM vendor should have done it to 1) have a real alternative to google controlled Android 2) get ARM out to more consumer devices 3) get their hardware features demonstrated more quickly Google should have done it (yeah ChromeOS sucks)...... well, we I'm shocked ChromeOS hasn't been dropped yet and Google would never have stuck with it. But none of that matters now, it should have been done 20 years ago. And Apple seems to be the only hardware company that does software well.