4 ms·

Not even mentioning the #1 reason: freedom

by bobim 2y ago

fuzztester 2y ago
#2: hackability
- rahen 2y ago
  This is becoming less and less the case, unless you use a more DIY-oriented distribution such as Void. Most systemd distributions have a lot of technical merit (I like Fedora Silverblue), but they are increasingly becoming monolithic, so hackability isn't one of their strengths. I remember a time when Linux was pure anarchy, with loosely coupled independent subsystems that could easily be experimented with and replaced. Now, most distributions are much closer to macOS: they "just work", but you're not supposed to mess with them. So long for hackability.
  - worik 2y ago
    > Most systemd distributions have a lot of technical ... but they are increasingly becoming monolithic, I am not a fan of Systemd for irrelevant reasons. But the "monolithic" nature of systems has to do with the interdependence of the parts not the glue. > I remember a time when Linux was pure anarchy, with loosely coupled independent subsystems Sounds like my Linux box I have for fun. We are still making systems like that, but for business purposes we were always making solid and staid systems. Very little has changed, only the words we use to say it (and the raw power of the underlying hardware of course!)
  - fuzztester 2y ago
    >I remember a time when Linux was I (literally) remember a time from some years before Linux just was - because i was alive, and working in software, then. source code of packages, including major ones, was available to download ... and source code for programs was available probably much before the technique of downloading was even a thing. people used to ship around programs in source code format via (magnetic) tapes or usenet or sneakernet, later, floppies, etc. see the Jargon File for much more computer lore than you would ever want to know about, including some of this stuff, although plenty of it is interesting, imo. >So long for hackability. pardon me. are Linux distributions not downloadable as source anymore? I guess, to many devs, including me, that's the ultimate meaning of hackability. because then you can hack anything from the top to the bottom of the stack. still editing ...
- bananamerica 2y ago
  In many relevant ways, Windows is more easily hackable than Linux. That is in no small part due to Autohotkey, but also many other tools made by independent programmers. Autohotkey is vastly superior to anything available on Linux, where one must string together several arcane tools to achieve similar scripting effects. Autohotkey serves for everything, it is extreme reliable and predictable. I know someone will shout "there's Autokey on Linux! And pyautogui!". Rest assured, I know these tools. They're not nearly as reliable and comprehensive as Autohotkey is on Windows.
  - nequo 2y ago
    Is AutoHotkey like Emacs keybindings and hooks but for the whole OS?
    - bananamerica 2y ago
      I would most certainly not compare Autohotkey to Emacs in that way, as Emacs, powerful as it is, is not really meant to be the same as Autohotkey. However, Autohotkey can do pretty much anything you can think of in terms of GUI OS level local automation (for cli, I'd probably use WSL). On Linux, I may sometimes have to glue xmodmap + xcape + xbindkeys + xdotool + wmctrl + whatever-else in a bash script that will probably require reading multiple man pages and multiple iterations to get right. Autohotkey would only require accessing a single source of solid documentation, as it can all be done in a single Autohotkey script that doesn't rely on any other tool. More often than not GPT will give you the entire code that you need on the first or second response. But it only knows Autohotkey version 1.
      - dwattttt 2y ago
        Or for a more "hackable" experience on Windows, you can do what (I expect) AutoHotKey does, and send window messages to apps to trigger "key press" and "mouse down at X coords". By analogy it's as is there's a single stable interface to the GUI layers in apps mediated by the OS, instead of poking at X APIs.
throwawaysleep 2y ago
A vastly overrated reason unless you are regularly in conflict with corporate entities/the government.
- tejtm 2y ago
  If non-corporeal entities have priorities that are incongruent with a living individual preferences the default should be the actual person's choice. How is this even a question? (edit: to not put words in anyone else's mouth)
- worik 2y ago
  > A vastly overrated reason unless you are regularly in conflict with corporate entities/the government. Software freedom is a very important business property. Closed source software can be OK while it is supported, and the licencing agreements not too onerous. But when those conditions no longer apply, very expensive retooling ensues. I have seen this often Free software does not suffer those fates. This is a very important business reason for Free Software
- bobim 2y ago
  Nope, example: the knowledge I build using OpenRadioss is mine until I die, while the knowledge I build using Abaqus is locked behind a 200k paywall.

Not even mentioning the #1 reason: freedom

by bobim 2y ago

Not even mentioning the #1 reason: freedom

fuzztester 2y ago

#2: hackability

rahen 2y ago
This is becoming less and less the case, unless you use a more DIY-oriented distribution such as Void. Most systemd distributions have a lot of technical merit (I like Fedora Silverblue), but they are increasingly becoming monolithic, so hackability isn't one of their strengths. I remember a time when Linux was pure anarchy, with loosely coupled independent subsystems that could easily be experimented with and replaced. Now, most distributions are much closer to macOS: they "just work", but you're not supposed to mess with them. So long for hackability.
- worik 2y ago
  > Most systemd distributions have a lot of technical ... but they are increasingly becoming monolithic, I am not a fan of Systemd for irrelevant reasons. But the "monolithic" nature of systems has to do with the interdependence of the parts not the glue. > I remember a time when Linux was pure anarchy, with loosely coupled independent subsystems Sounds like my Linux box I have for fun. We are still making systems like that, but for business purposes we were always making solid and staid systems. Very little has changed, only the words we use to say it (and the raw power of the underlying hardware of course!)
- fuzztester 2y ago
  >I remember a time when Linux was I (literally) remember a time from some years before Linux just was - because i was alive, and working in software, then. source code of packages, including major ones, was available to download ... and source code for programs was available probably much before the technique of downloading was even a thing. people used to ship around programs in source code format via (magnetic) tapes or usenet or sneakernet, later, floppies, etc. see the Jargon File for much more computer lore than you would ever want to know about, including some of this stuff, although plenty of it is interesting, imo. >So long for hackability. pardon me. are Linux distributions not downloadable as source anymore? I guess, to many devs, including me, that's the ultimate meaning of hackability. because then you can hack anything from the top to the bottom of the stack. still editing ...
bananamerica 2y ago
In many relevant ways, Windows is more easily hackable than Linux. That is in no small part due to Autohotkey, but also many other tools made by independent programmers. Autohotkey is vastly superior to anything available on Linux, where one must string together several arcane tools to achieve similar scripting effects. Autohotkey serves for everything, it is extreme reliable and predictable. I know someone will shout "there's Autokey on Linux! And pyautogui!". Rest assured, I know these tools. They're not nearly as reliable and comprehensive as Autohotkey is on Windows.
- nequo 2y ago
  Is AutoHotkey like Emacs keybindings and hooks but for the whole OS?
  - bananamerica 2y ago
    I would most certainly not compare Autohotkey to Emacs in that way, as Emacs, powerful as it is, is not really meant to be the same as Autohotkey. However, Autohotkey can do pretty much anything you can think of in terms of GUI OS level local automation (for cli, I'd probably use WSL). On Linux, I may sometimes have to glue xmodmap + xcape + xbindkeys + xdotool + wmctrl + whatever-else in a bash script that will probably require reading multiple man pages and multiple iterations to get right. Autohotkey would only require accessing a single source of solid documentation, as it can all be done in a single Autohotkey script that doesn't rely on any other tool. More often than not GPT will give you the entire code that you need on the first or second response. But it only knows Autohotkey version 1.
    - dwattttt 2y ago
      Or for a more "hackable" experience on Windows, you can do what (I expect) AutoHotKey does, and send window messages to apps to trigger "key press" and "mouse down at X coords". By analogy it's as is there's a single stable interface to the GUI layers in apps mediated by the OS, instead of poking at X APIs.

throwawaysleep 2y ago

A vastly overrated reason unless you are regularly in conflict with corporate entities/the government.

tejtm 2y ago
If non-corporeal entities have priorities that are incongruent with a living individual preferences the default should be the actual person's choice. How is this even a question? (edit: to not put words in anyone else's mouth)
worik 2y ago
> A vastly overrated reason unless you are regularly in conflict with corporate entities/the government. Software freedom is a very important business property. Closed source software can be OK while it is supported, and the licencing agreements not too onerous. But when those conditions no longer apply, very expensive retooling ensues. I have seen this often Free software does not suffer those fates. This is a very important business reason for Free Software
bobim 2y ago
Nope, example: the knowledge I build using OpenRadioss is mine until I die, while the knowledge I build using Abaqus is locked behind a 200k paywall.