Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 03, 2016, 08:03:36 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop  (Read 27610 times)

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #50 on: September 05, 2012, 05:21:48 AM »
I don't hate Linux. Your assumptions on its advantages are plain wrong, that's all.
Oh, right: Call it a flamebait when someone points out your mistakes. Well played.

mahesh2k

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,417
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #51 on: September 05, 2012, 05:34:06 AM »
Quote
I don't hate Linux.

Spending time on every linux thread posting anti-linux commentary with SO called BSD lurve and Windows FACTS isn't hatred. Oops, I took bait.

Mistakes ? *nods*  :D

I am done. Keep playing.

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #52 on: September 05, 2012, 05:39:07 AM »
The mistakes you continuously ignored and still do.

Dude, I am Tuxman. Don't think I hate it. I just don't fanboy it.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #53 on: September 05, 2012, 05:42:30 AM »
duty_calls.png

Josh

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Points: -5
  • Posts: 3,395
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #54 on: September 05, 2012, 05:44:30 AM »
The mistakes you continuously ignored and still do.

Dude, I am Tuxman. Don't think I hate it. I just don't fanboy it.

Actually, as a moderator, the trolling you do in most of these threads is starting to annoy me as well....Just sayin...

rgdot

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2009
  • **
  • Posts: 1,879
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #55 on: September 05, 2012, 06:11:22 AM »
 :P


Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #56 on: September 05, 2012, 06:11:47 AM »
Actually, as a moderator, you get me wrong....Just sayin...

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #57 on: September 05, 2012, 06:22:49 AM »
Actually, as a moderator, you get me wrong....Just sayin...

@T-Man: Perhaps several of us do?

Maybe you could work on your presentation skills a bit so we don't come away with the wrong impression; and we can work on our interpretive skills a bit so we don't get the wrong impression?

This is DoCo. We're all in this together. And none of us really have to be here.

Just sayin'... ;) :)

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #58 on: September 05, 2012, 06:33:45 AM »
Yep, we are together, and as such it is foolish to call people here a troll just because they don't follow recent hypes.

See, even asking "Why?" as a reply to the statement "Linux is better" is considered "trolling" here. The young internet generation does not know real trolling anymore.

It is not always my intention to make fun of people because they use Linsux, SackOS, BSDumb or Windoze (look, that works for quite everything!) or whatever the currently hyped operating system is. All (almost) I have a serious problem with are people who try to evangelize other users for their own system without real arguments.

mahesh2k tried, I asked why, he called me a troll.
Hey, moderator, someone here does not follow the hype. Ban him!

I am pretty sure I am here because DonationCoder is usually open for technical discussions. I did not know it is against the board rules to question the advantages of Linux and OSX. Sorry, must have read them wrong.

mahesh2k

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,417
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #59 on: September 05, 2012, 06:52:21 AM »
Quote
mahesh2k tried, I asked why, he called me a troll.

Because you are. You never explained yourself about your views, you pushed your observation. You attacked others with calling them fanboys when you came out same trolling fanboyish excuses in almost every thread.  You just made attacks on people and presented so called FACTS which are mere observation. All of your so-called facts are just your observation. Live with it. Just like rest of us have our own regarding other OS. If it bites you so much to read others views and get hurt with assumption that others are evangelizing or fanboying about it, better not read their views. You are doing no good by attacking others. Yes, you are attacking others. If you can't see it then then that's your problem.

This is the reason I wanted ignore button.




Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #60 on: September 05, 2012, 06:57:50 AM »
You never explained yourself about your views, you pushed your observation.
Oh, my views should be known from what I post.

You just made attacks on people
Vice versa.

and presented so called FACTS which are mere observation.
Nope, they're facts. Things I don't know for sure are usually stated as a question, like: Why?
(What about an answer instead of arguing with me by the way?)

All of your so-called facts are just your observation. Live with it.
So "Linux is always better option" is what, precisely?
Right: just your observation. Live with it.

But don't condemn me for not sharing it.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,405
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #61 on: September 05, 2012, 06:58:48 AM »
I am pretty sure I am here because DonationCoder is usually open for technical discussions. I did not know it is against the board rules to question the advantages of Linux and OSX. Sorry, must have read them wrong.

As 40hz said- it's the presentation, not the comment.  When you say...

Bullshit. That urban myth is not true anymore since... uhm... Windows Me? Or Windows 98?
Of course a system with a lot of auto-start entries will start slower.

Even Linux.

Now what?

Most people are going to take that as a bit condescending and thus... flamebait.  If you'd leave it to the arguments rather than adding on the snide finishers (you are pretty good at 'witty' repartee), then I believe that you'd find the audience more receptive to your arguments.

From Debate Ideas and Suggestions:
Quote
6. Attack the idea not the person.
16. Smile when disagreeing.
19. Avoid bickering, quarreling, and wrangling.
20. Watch your tone of voice.
22. Keep your perspective - You're just debating.

You need to be very polite when disagreeing with someone in English, even someone you know quite well.
With someone you know very well, you can disagree more directly.


Shades

  • Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 2,096
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #62 on: September 05, 2012, 07:01:26 AM »
Well, from my experience with both Windows and Linux on the desktop and on the server, I agree with Tuxman (but only a bit). The servers I run that give me no headache in any kind of way are the ones that run on Linux (Ubuntu server edition (without any graphical shell)). These are fast and very, very reliable. Windows Server is solid, but not nearly as reliable and require a lot more maintenance in comparison with the Linux ones.

All the PC's that were running Linux on their desktop have been phased out. Too problematic (granted, I had to use CentOS 4.0 and 5.0, you should not want to do that to your worst enemy) and for my intends and purposes not cost effective. After some security tweaks the Windows desktop PC's (XP and Win7) I have nearly as solid as Windows Server editions and are way more productive to me (Directory Opus version 9 or 10 is essential to my workflow) than Linux ever was.

The only experience I have with BSD is building a router PC from very old parts I still had laying around (286, 16Mb). It (only) took that PC 3 full days to compile/install BSD. Also very reliable for the six months of "life" the processor still had left in it.

As a one-man-show I could not find the time to continue with the BSD route though. As I already have very high reliability with Linux (and Windows is not doing too bad either) I could not  
find sufficient reason to get more/better acquainted with BSD. Too much differences for too little gain in my case.

My :two:

 
    

mahesh2k

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,417
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #63 on: September 05, 2012, 07:03:42 AM »
Quote
Right: just your observation. Live with it.

I am living with it actually. So are you going to stop attacking me and others on every linux thread for our opinion with your so-called FACTS and BSD lurve? That would be good for DC's forum peace.

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #64 on: September 05, 2012, 07:07:51 AM »
Less attacking and more answering my questions ("Why?") would be good for the forum peace too, pal.

Shades: Tried PC-BSD?  :D

mahesh2k

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,417
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #65 on: September 05, 2012, 07:09:22 AM »
Quote
Less attacking and more answering my questions ("Why?") would be good for the forum peace too, pal.

As I said, I am entitled to my opinion and I am not obliged to answer your question. You can continue with your attacks.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #66 on: September 05, 2012, 07:46:16 AM »
FWIW I've had very high reliability with Windows, Linux and BSD in the server environment. When problems occurred they were caused by server applications (webs, email, etc.) running on them.

Truth is, doing a server as a simple server (other than OpenBSD  ::)) is really no big deal. The underlying core code for a server is usually rock solid. But the minute you go beyond basic authentication, and file/print sharing functions, it can get complicated and bothersome.

I've had Windows 200x servers running for years with no downtime other than for routine hardware or software maintenance. Supposedly that can't happen according to some. But I've seen it in dozens of places I've done work for - and in every place where I did the server setup.:mrgreen: Same goes for Linux and BSD. I've done both many times and I've seen enough to say there isn't one flavor of server thats superior to all the others for every possible installation. Just some that are better than others for specific requirements or environments. (And I will confess a minor and wholly personal preference for BSD. Probably more because it was the first server I ever learned than anything else.)

On the desktop it's been a mixed bag. Windows has relatively few problems that are often difficult or impossible to fix on a timely basis. Linux breaks slightly more often, but it's easier to diagnose and (mostly) faster to fix. I don't know anybody who is running BSD as their primary desktop. I have Dragonfly running on one of my PCs. It's very nice - and frankly a little boring. Most of the 'fun' stuff (unless you're a physicist researching subatomic particles or involved in astronomy/cosmology) is happening over on the Linux or Windows desktop.

IMO, where Linux falls down for the desktop is in its lack of standardization.

End users, as a whole, demand something be predictable and standardized. It doesn't need to be a great standard - or even a very good one. Good enough will do for daily use. (Especially since social site crawling, media downloading, email, and porn-surfing make up about 75% of all desktop activity. Wordprocessing and spreadsheeting make up about 5%. And the remaining 20% is used playing games - either games like WoW - or the more serious games hosted by E*Trade and it's ilk.)

Where Microsoft was smart was in providing that standard, along with just enough 'fun' and silliness to make it compelling.

And that's something that generally enrages people who code or otherwise get involved with something like Linux. Unfortunately, that created an early elitist culture. And once it became glaringly obvious (since these people were no dummies) that Linux was not innately superior to much anything else, the elitism morphed into a new attitude of "Who cares." whenever anybody raised the basic question "Why Linux? I just don't get it."

It's really not so much a technical issue as it is a people issue. And when dealing with people, perception is everything. And perception is not something smart people, for all their cleverness, tend to be very good at managing.

I think the takeaway is that Linux and its developers tend to be a little too smart and 'right' (i.e. technically correct) for their own good - if the goal is to promote Linux for the desktop.

But if that is the case, the only way it will change (short of Microsoft sinking into the Pacific Ocean after The Big One) is if they lose the "Who cares." and fuggetaboutit attitude and stop ignoring the fact that being 'more correct' is not always the optimal solution.


40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #67 on: September 05, 2012, 07:48:59 AM »
@m2k: <consider it deleted>   8)
« Last Edit: September 05, 2012, 08:39:59 AM by 40hz, Reason: Deleted original post @ request of mahesh2k »

mouser

  • First Author
  • Administrator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,406
    • View Profile
    • Mouser's Software Zone on DonationCoder.com
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #68 on: September 05, 2012, 07:59:07 AM »
This thread is pretty mild, but still, I'd like to remind all long time DC members in particular, that on this forum you are expected to be respectful of each other.  ESPECIALLY those of you who have hundreds or even thousands of posts -- you are expected to set an example in terms of making the extra effort to extend the utmost respect to those you are talking to, even if they are not doing so in return.  Please refrain from insulting each other here.

mahesh2k

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,417
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #69 on: September 05, 2012, 08:17:14 AM »
Quote
@ mahesh2k & tuxman - Umm...could you two maybe start you own thread and take it over there if its going to continue? People are trying to have a conversation here.

I am done with him. I don't mind if all my posts in this thread are removed. I have no plans on continuing with him at all and you can read my posts to get the hint of that. I am not chasing people in every thread with flamebait, nuf said. Thanks to mouser or whoever moderator deleted the last reply from Tuxman. I didn't posted after my last post and I wasn't planning on replying on his posts after that too, but still I appreciate stopping the attack fest by deleting his reply. I don't understand @40hz, why you made this post to take the thread back to that discussion. Ignoring usually works. I did the same. I would appreciate if mods delete both this and your quoted reply, so discussion goes back on topic.

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,764
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #70 on: September 05, 2012, 08:19:12 AM »
Ah, that peaceableness.  :-*

I love how you even rumble without me writing anything, young friend.
Could someone please finally remove the personal attacks against me?

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #71 on: September 05, 2012, 08:21:26 AM »
Ok. I'm out.  :)
« Last Edit: September 05, 2012, 08:40:35 AM by 40hz »

f0dder

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,029
  • [Well, THAT escalated quickly!]
    • View Profile
    • f0dder's place
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #72 on: September 06, 2012, 06:54:40 AM »
Honestly, you don't need crappy windows. I used OSX and Linux and they don't show performance issues like windows. Not even windows 7 solved performance issue problem. More you use windows, less usable it becomes, after you add more data, reg entries and stuff.
I personally haven't seen this since I moved away from Win9x. The registry is pretty efficient, definitely a lot more efficient than re-parsing text files all the time :) - the only problems I've seen have been caused by really badly written 3rd party software, and the cause hasn't been "too much data in the registry", it's been "really broken data" (which just coincidentally happened to be located in the registry).

Those who are using Visual studio knows Why I am saying this, because microsoft's own programs make the system unusable.
I've been running every single version (not every edition, of course!) and service pack of Visual Studio from 6 to 2010 SP1, and will soon be installing 2012. I've even been using VS on Win9x. While the first VS.NET version was pretty crappy and unstable, I've never had VS affect my system stability, and never heard of stories like that from friends or co-workers.

On the other hand, OSX based on unix is perfectly fine. Doesn't break or gets crashed with official softwares and upgrades.
Most of the developers at my current job are on OSX laptops. A bunch of them started cursing some months ago after installing whatever-cat-named-update because their systems got bogged down (disk paging, beach ball icon, and sometime systems so unresponsive they had to hardboot them) - seems like Apple messed up the memory manager, majorly. Not something you'll see if you're just drinking caffè latte and not using your shiny laptop for facebook and hipstagram - but definitely if you're actually using the machine. And should I mention the funny instances where the battery expands somewhat (natural thing to do because of heat), messing up the touchpad? Or the various data-loss incidents there's been in Finder?

Sure, there's some nice things about OSX, and the build quality on some macbooks is better than a lot of non-OSX PCs. But there's plenty of problems as well, and plenty of funny security holes as well :-)
- carpe noctem

Stoic Joker

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 6,294
    • View Profile
    • www.StoicJoker.com
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #73 on: September 06, 2012, 07:20:59 AM »
Those who are using Visual studio knows Why I am saying this, because microsoft's own programs make the system unusable.
I've been running every single version (not every edition, of course!) and service pack of Visual Studio from 6 to 2010 SP1, and will soon be installing 2012. I've even been using VS on Win9x. While the first VS.NET version was pretty crappy and unstable, I've never had VS affect my system stability, and never heard of stories like that from friends or co-workers.

Same here all the way back to 9x. Hell we've even got one guy that (does legacy stuff) is still doing VB code with VS6, on Windows 8.

jgpaiva

  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2006
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,727
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: What went wrong with Linux on the Desktop
« Reply #74 on: September 06, 2012, 07:32:42 AM »
Most of the developers at my current job are on OSX laptops. A bunch of them started cursing some months ago after installing whatever-cat-named-update because their systems got bogged down (disk paging, beach ball icon, and sometime systems so unresponsive they had to hardboot them) - seems like Apple messed up the memory manager, majorly. Not something you'll see if you're just drinking caffè latte and not using your shiny laptop for facebook and hipstagram - but definitely if you're actually using the machine.
As someone who has been using OSX for over two years (an imac and a macbook pro), I can confirm this. Memory management in OSX makes no sense, the system is constantly paging stuff even though there's more than enough free memory for everything. Almost every time I leave eclipse open during the night, when I return on the next day and set focus on the window I have to watch the beach ball for a few minutes while it pages back stuff; also, usually it's faster just to kill eclipse and reopen it than wait for it to be paged in again. Also, we have 20+ macs at my workplace, and around 50% of them have had to go back to apple for fixing various stuff; all the 2year+ ones have serious marks all over the screen similar to sunburn, despite the fact that none get direct sunlight.

A related complaint: I see the beach ball at least once a week, apparently for no reason: in this situation usually the memory is half free and the CPU isn't being used at all. Also, I can see more youtube videos at the same time in my girlfriend's phone than on either of my macs (more than one is pushing it). And I can't use this awesome stuff with any of the macs because it's simply too slow (both macs are dual cores with 4gb ram) and the laptop will burn a hole on whatever it is resting on.

Sorry for the rant, but I really could go on forever on why you do not want to buy a mac. The fact that it runs something that looks like unix is awesome, though. (and the touchpads, mice and keyboards are the best invention ever)
« Last Edit: September 06, 2012, 07:38:25 AM by jgpaiva »