4 ms·

I'll add this to my list of essential Windows apps that should be built-in, right alongside PowerToys, Process Explorer, and Chocolatey. I wish there was a main

by 63 3y ago

I'll add this to my list of essential Windows apps that should be built-in, right alongside PowerToys, Process Explorer, and Chocolatey. I wish there was a mainstream competitor that could force MS to make a decent OS again (I already use Linux, but most people don't and it sure doesn't seem to be in a strong enough position to put any pressure on MS)

eviks 3y ago
And Everything above all (Linux doesn't have it, so no pressure)
jchw 3y ago
Linux is in a terrible position right now, I think right now might be the worst time to use Linux in a while, especially with being somewhere around halfway between the long, long Xorg/Wayland transition. People are right to be skeptical of whether it's worth the effort, but I am excited to see some problems being tackled that never really had great solutions in the past. (Examples: Mixed fractional DPI, proper and fully baked HDR and color profiles, high and variable mixed refresh rate, standard IME protocols, a good modern accessibility protocol in planning, possibly quite good open source NVIDIA RTX 20xx+ drivers soon?!) I'm not sure if Linux will ever be pressure to MS for desktop Windows, though. Valve seems to be the most likely party to make it happen, but much like previous cases they're really carving out a new space for Linux to potentially hold a strong position in, not really competing on MS's home turf of desktop and laptop computers. Though, it is promising that Valve has built their commercial products on a fairly standard desktop stack, as it does seem to be leading to ecosystem-wide improvements that will still improve the situation for people who are willing to make concessions to use alternative operating systems.
- lionkor 3y ago
  I use Linux daily at home, and I think it may be important to note my experiences and my setup: Intel CPU, RTX 2070, 1440p@160Hz screen (with HDR, which doesnt work). ArchLinux. What works: - every game I want to play, from multiplayer shooters, over single player games, super old games, racing games, simulator games, etc. works. Some required going to protondb and reading there, applying the fixes. - programming/work obviously is possible when it wasnt on windows (much better dev experience) - I have a live boot arch iso USB because every few months, an update bricks my install. No idea why, but it does. I do read the update mails. The fix is usually to boot into the USB, mount my drives, chroot, mkinitcpio, and reboot. I suspect it's an issue with some driver or firmware. - I use Xorg KDE Plasma, works very well. No visual issues. You dont have to switch to wayland ;)
  - jchw 3y ago
    For what its worth I think Linux can work great, and obviously you definitely do not need to switch to Wayland. However, what I really mean to say is, it's in a rough position for anyone looking to switch. While you may say "ah, just use X11" and I'd even totally agree, the problem is that many users genuinely need things that only Wayland does well, like again, for laptops mixed DPI is a damn-near must-have and it just isn't a very good experience on X no matter what you do. Also, what distro to recommend? Honestly, I find Arch to be one of the best mixes of stable and reliable, which is odd. Somehow I find Pop!_OS and Ubuntu installs with fucked up dpkg issues that I can't even figure out, and sometimes I wind up just manually grabbing packages with apt download and forcing things into a correct state. I'd expect Arch with an inexperienced user to be worse, but multiple datapoints strongly disagree so far; the biggest issue with Arch has just been installs. If Arch were friendlier to install and had smoother updates, it would be hands-down the way to go for noobs. Archinstall is certainly a step forward from browsing the wiki on lynx, so there is that. Feels, though, like there should be some immutable "just works" distro, that gives users a good mix of things. Like... give users an immutable base with image based deployment. Flatpak apps. Maybe ChromeOS crostini-style chroots to use a "traditional" distro? SteamOS is somewhere close here. I like Linux, and I use only Linux on my own hardware aside from VMs (and practically only NixOS at that) but is it in a position to seriously eat at Windows? I think not in the desktop and laptop market. Hopefully some day, though.
    - lionkor 3y ago
      Absolutely agree with you on all points, and I think Arch is often falsely thought of as unstable. Its rolling, but of course the software is vetted and stable. I have had other distros break in more ways and more destructively than arch, for sure
  - ozyschmozy 3y ago
    > every few months, an update bricks my install I'm really curious about why this is. I have a desktop I update daily, a laptop I update very irregularly (once even went without an update for over a year), and a toy server that I update once a year or so (I know, terrible security practice). All running arch. And I think I've had two situations where something broke significantly after an update, and even those didn't require a live boot USB. What desktop environment/window manager/compositor do you use? I'd guess one of those is the culprit if anything

by 63 3y ago

eviks 3y ago

And Everything above all (Linux doesn't have it, so no pressure)

jchw 3y ago

Linux is in a terrible position right now, I think right now might be the worst time to use Linux in a while, especially with being somewhere around halfway between the long, long Xorg/Wayland transition. People are right to be skeptical of whether it's worth the effort, but I am excited to see some problems being tackled that never really had great solutions in the past. (Examples: Mixed fractional DPI, proper and fully baked HDR and color profiles, high and variable mixed refresh rate, standard IME protocols, a good modern accessibility protocol in planning, possibly quite good open source NVIDIA RTX 20xx+ drivers soon?!) I'm not sure if Linux will ever be pressure to MS for desktop Windows, though. Valve seems to be the most likely party to make it happen, but much like previous cases they're really carving out a new space for Linux to potentially hold a strong position in, not really competing on MS's home turf of desktop and laptop computers. Though, it is promising that Valve has built their commercial products on a fairly standard desktop stack, as it does seem to be leading to ecosystem-wide improvements that will still improve the situation for people who are willing to make concessions to use alternative operating systems.

lionkor 3y ago
I use Linux daily at home, and I think it may be important to note my experiences and my setup: Intel CPU, RTX 2070, 1440p@160Hz screen (with HDR, which doesnt work). ArchLinux. What works: - every game I want to play, from multiplayer shooters, over single player games, super old games, racing games, simulator games, etc. works. Some required going to protondb and reading there, applying the fixes. - programming/work obviously is possible when it wasnt on windows (much better dev experience) - I have a live boot arch iso USB because every few months, an update bricks my install. No idea why, but it does. I do read the update mails. The fix is usually to boot into the USB, mount my drives, chroot, mkinitcpio, and reboot. I suspect it's an issue with some driver or firmware. - I use Xorg KDE Plasma, works very well. No visual issues. You dont have to switch to wayland ;)
- jchw 3y ago
  For what its worth I think Linux can work great, and obviously you definitely do not need to switch to Wayland. However, what I really mean to say is, it's in a rough position for anyone looking to switch. While you may say "ah, just use X11" and I'd even totally agree, the problem is that many users genuinely need things that only Wayland does well, like again, for laptops mixed DPI is a damn-near must-have and it just isn't a very good experience on X no matter what you do. Also, what distro to recommend? Honestly, I find Arch to be one of the best mixes of stable and reliable, which is odd. Somehow I find Pop!_OS and Ubuntu installs with fucked up dpkg issues that I can't even figure out, and sometimes I wind up just manually grabbing packages with apt download and forcing things into a correct state. I'd expect Arch with an inexperienced user to be worse, but multiple datapoints strongly disagree so far; the biggest issue with Arch has just been installs. If Arch were friendlier to install and had smoother updates, it would be hands-down the way to go for noobs. Archinstall is certainly a step forward from browsing the wiki on lynx, so there is that. Feels, though, like there should be some immutable "just works" distro, that gives users a good mix of things. Like... give users an immutable base with image based deployment. Flatpak apps. Maybe ChromeOS crostini-style chroots to use a "traditional" distro? SteamOS is somewhere close here. I like Linux, and I use only Linux on my own hardware aside from VMs (and practically only NixOS at that) but is it in a position to seriously eat at Windows? I think not in the desktop and laptop market. Hopefully some day, though.
  - lionkor 3y ago
    Absolutely agree with you on all points, and I think Arch is often falsely thought of as unstable. Its rolling, but of course the software is vetted and stable. I have had other distros break in more ways and more destructively than arch, for sure
- ozyschmozy 3y ago
  > every few months, an update bricks my install I'm really curious about why this is. I have a desktop I update daily, a laptop I update very irregularly (once even went without an update for over a year), and a toy server that I update once a year or so (I know, terrible security practice). All running arch. And I think I've had two situations where something broke significantly after an update, and even those didn't require a live boot USB. What desktop environment/window manager/compositor do you use? I'd guess one of those is the culprit if anything