7 ms·

Glad to see that Microsoft is making Windows more and more similar to Linux by every passing day :)

• gchamonlive 3y ago
  You mean 90's Linux?
  • OsrsNeedsf2P 3y ago
    Hey! Some of us still use Linux the old "hacker command line" way
    • fsflover 3y ago
      It doesn't mean that you have to.
      • cesarb 3y ago
        It's hard to avoid. I know I can open the GUI file manager to look at a directory, and sometimes I try to force myself to do that, but way too often I quickly open a terminal and type a "ls" command. It's just what I got used to when I first started using computers back in the 1990s, and habits can be hard to break.
    • gchamonlive 3y ago
      I use arch btw, and even then with zsh, shell highlighting, annotations, fuzzy finder and vim on steroids, the "hacker way" can be really different from two decades ago.
  • jstummbillig 3y ago
    Are you claiming that using Linux in 2023 will not pretty much require "command line fiddling" to some unavoidable degree (unless you have somebody else do the setup for you and day to day just use what's there)? Because, if so, that would very much not be my experience. Broadly speaking, what advancements am I likely missing out on?
    • graemep 3y ago
      Depends on distro and usage, but once installed Linux does not need command line fiddling. There are GUIs for installing and updating the OS and applications and pretty much everything else an average user does.
      • jstummbillig 3y ago
        In that case I will have to disagree. I run a stock, up to date Ubuntu. Yes, there is a GUI for a lot of things, but I will most certainly run into something that will require me to drop to the CLI before long – which I am fine with, but I am not going to pretend it won't inevitably happen. My experience is: On Windows, for most enduser use cases (and this absolutely excludes anything dev related), I would expect the user to get by without touching the CLI. In fact, I would assume that any given application will expose all of its functionality only through a graphical UI. For me, on Linux, the opposite expectation applies.
        • rigid 3y ago
          also nothing in linux will ever just give some cryptic hex code error or crash report. It's either crashdump or nice error message. If not I just increase loglevel to find the actual problem.
        • swells34 3y ago
          I disagree. On stock Ubuntu, there is no normal situation you'll run into where you must use a terminal. If you decide to do something that requires a terminal, that's a different story. But basically every normal operation you'd do on windows GUI (and more...), you have a GUI option available on Ubuntu; it is the Windows of the Linux world, and it behaves as such.
          • gverrilla 3y ago
            Cmon my ubuntu stock can't even remember my sound input options, which are reset on each reboot. There's no option for that on the GUI. Also upgrading linux can be a big pain for non-experts. I've been using dualboot windows/linux for a long time, and I simply don't upgrade ubuntu: I'll do a fresh install if I want/need the new version.
  • lupusreal 3y ago
    Yeah, in OpenSUSE I'd just rollback a bad update like this. Automatic snapshotting before and after all package manager operations is very nice.
• msla 3y ago
  Yeah, this isn't Linux. Linux is better than this these days.
  • bheadmaster 3y ago
    Of course. Things are not perfect, but most of the popular (GNU/)Linux distributions gone a long way from the old days of requiring terminal fixes. I just meant it as a lighthearted joke.
  • carlosjobim 3y ago
    Except for if you want to use dual monitors, etc. etc. Every time I've tried Linux, I've had to dive into the terminal and paste commands from the internet to get normal things to work.
    • mr_mitm 3y ago
      Was this in the past decade or before?
      • carlosjobim 3y ago
        A couple of years ago.
    • trelane 3y ago
      Only two monitors? I've no problem with more than that. I don't know what hardware you're using, but that's atypical.
      • arcticbeans 3y ago
        [dead]
      • carlosjobim 3y ago
        Two monitors with different DPI. Couldn't get them to work well without running a weird xrandr script on every boot with some "1.9999999999...." setting.
• sixothree 3y ago
  Did a fresh install of windows 11 yesterday and winget doesn’t work. Seriously. I haven’t even installed any software yet.
  • krger 3y ago
    The output turns blue and nothing happens? Update Terminal and then winget will work.
    • sixothree 3y ago
      No I was getting "0x8a15000f : Data required by the source is missing" out of the box. Then after that went away it was another error. It might be related to this not being a "local only" account and not a microsoft account. Ultimately, thinking winget can be used like apt to get a new system up and running is misguided on my part.
  • kotaKat 3y ago
    You have to wait for all the back-end updates to finish. Install all the Windows Updates, then open Microsoft Store and go to the Library and wait for it to update even more shit, then you finally will have Terminal and WinGet. Yeah, I found that one out the annoying way too.
    • sixothree 3y ago
      Maybe I was experiencing something else on top of that because I was getting exception codes at first. But then once I started getting "source errors" I decided to check the store and such and that's when things started working more normally. What's surprising though is that it listed the msstore source as operating normally when I did winget source update. Regardless, kind of crappy this doesn't work out of the box and I have wave dead things not mentioned in any instructions to get this dumb thing working.
      • kotaKat 3y ago
        My experience (and path that lead to this) was realizing that a fresh install of Windows 11 gave me PowerShell and not Terminal in the Win+X menu. WinGet would... launch, but provide no output. And of course, it was my first time trying to use WinGet in general... A few reboots later suddenly Win+X had Terminal and WinGet started working, and on a subsequent reinstall in a VM I spotted that, yeah, apparently all the extra WinGet, Terminal, etc stuff all has to be pushed from the MS Store instead of Windows Update. Total pain in the ass.
• hooby 3y ago
  I really do not agree with this comparison. Yes, it is true, that on Linux there are many, many things which are best done through command line fiddling. But installing a system update, that update borking things, belching up a totally cryptic error message, and then forcing you to clean up the mess through the command line, is nothing something I've experienced on Linux so far. For me, apt updates have always been super reliable - and error messages have mostly been quite specific and easy to google. So, this specific case seems nothing like Linux to me.
  • jstummbillig 3y ago
    > For me, apt updates have always been super reliable - and error messages have mostly been quite specific and easy to google. The ocean between. While you or me might appreciate a good error message and handy debugging options, the standard windows user experience is optimised to not confront users with errors at all. Either approach comes with its trade offs and is implemented with varying degrees of success.
    • swells34 3y ago
      Ah yes, the classic "if I can't see the bad thing, it doesn't exist" approach to problem solving.
      • jstummbillig 3y ago
        Different design goals. While there's tension between Windows/Linux (which, interestingly, has over the years partly been released by each adopting pages of the others' playbook) there are a lot of complex or critical systems in the world, where displaying an error message to the user is clearly not a great design choice.
        • swells34 3y ago
          Yes, and some people just want to take their car to the mechanic, while other people want to fix theirs. It's a classic struggle in any area. The big difference though, is if I use my car in a professional capacity, I want to know how to change my own oil, because I'm not an idiot. I want to be able to fix simple issues, because that's just being professionally responsible. Windows discourages this kind of professional responsibility, hides everything it can that would give you an inkling of what's going on under the hood. Microsoft wants you to be dependent on them for doing ANYTHING out of the ordinary. And of course, when anything out of the ordinary occurs, there is wailing and gnashing of teeth from millions of windows users, billions of dollars lost by their employers, and all the Linux users just stare in disbelief that y'all don't know how to change your own oil. If you use a computer for work, should probably know how it works. Microsoft has intentionally made it difficult, so... Have you tried Linux, the backbone of modern computing, installed on more devices than Windows by at least a factor of two?
• swells34 3y ago
  I've never had an update issue on a Linux device. I update whenever I like, and have never been forced to. Occasionally some items fail due to dependency issues, the error messages are very descriptive, I handle the dependencies and move on with the update. Failed updates are a uniquely Windows issue in my experience, had something like 10-15 of them in my lifetime.
  • masto 3y ago
    Your experience differs from mine. If I only count major incidents, I've had at least two occasions where a Linux operating system update completely hosed my system. One was a Rackspace VPS I never managed to recover, I had to use their management tools to download a binary image of the unbootable disk and fuss around to mount it and get my files off so I could build a new server. I'm very hesitant to touch Linux updates, but I am occasionally "forced to" when I need to run a new piece of software that ends up being like pulling on a loose string on a sweater.
    • swells34 3y ago
      That's quite strange. What distro? For a while I was managing several hundred Linux devices remotely, so I've done thousands of updates with no issues. Linux has been my daily driver for 15 years, and never had an update issue there (that I didn't create myself). Specifically the thing I've NEVER had an issue with was a standard system update. Apt upgrade, pacman or yay -SYU, things of that nature. Had plenty of problems when trying to do weird shit, but I've also learned how to solve those problems. I've never borked an important system so bad it became unrecoverable. Some distros are prone to update failure because they always give you bleeding edge releases. I'd suggest running Debian, a ridiculously stable "fire and forget" system. Many rolling distros, like Arch, I'd say to update every couple of days to avoid dependency chain problems. But again, none of this is difficult beyond having to read some documentation, and none of this should even be able to cause system loss. Did you do something else weird that you forgot to mention?
      • masto 3y ago
        In answer to the question, no, I did not forget to mention that I did anything "weird". It was apt-get upgrade. I'm not going to have an argument about my personal experience. You can find plenty of others in the comments who have had similar problems. I enjoyed the response, as I've been joking for 20+ years that 95% of the time Linux advocates will tell anyone running into issues "you're using the wrong distro".
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]