Author Topic: Why Linux sucks (and how to fix it) VS. Linux doesn't suck (and I can prove it) (Read 17297 times)

Edvard · « **on:** August 14, 2012, 12:14 AM »

Pretty cool pair of vids by the same guy (clever trick). You can form your own opinion (and probably already have).
I found myself mostly agreeing with what he says in the first vid (with a few caveats) and was entertained by the second one.
EDIT: It's this guy -> http://lunduke.com/

So, without further ado, and at the risk of scaring off potential new Linux users, or possibly gathering more in... enjoy:

Why Linux Sucks and How To Fix It
2012 is an amazing time for Linux. Huge changes. Amazing opportunities. ...And lots and lots of ways that using Linux just plain sucks. We'll look at some of the more interesting (to me) things that Linux sucks at -- and exactly how to fix them.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh-cnaJoGCw

Why Linux Does Not Suck
Some bozo here at Linux Fest NW has a session called "Why Linux Sucks". Well, he's wrong. Not only is Linux great... but there is not one single thing that it sucks at. NOT ONE. And I'll prove it (and provide you with the ammunition needed to destroy any anti-Linux argument... IN THE WORLD).

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=BfLqLK7VdQY

40hz · « **Reply #1 on:** August 14, 2012, 03:04 AM »

40hz · « **Reply #2 on:** August 14, 2012, 03:12 AM »

Lunduke is a great guy. He was co-host of The Linux Action Show podcast up until recently. Interesting person to listen to. He can also be insane at times. But I actually find it more worthwhile when I find myself disagreeing with something he's said. (note: He actually likes Unity!)

He's also a professional coder (ex: Inspiration, Awesome Blocks of Awesome, etc.) who has his own business (Radical Breeze Software). So his points are generally spot on and go way beyond the usual fluff found in many podcasts. He even runs his own old-style text BBS - on a netbook - and which he is now planning on moving over to his Raspberry Pi. (You really can't get any more geek than that. )

The above two vids are examples Bryan at his best.

Thx for sharing them!

Tuxman · « **Reply #3 on:** August 14, 2012, 03:46 AM »

"How to fix Linux's sucking": Install BSD. Done.

Edvard · « **Reply #4 on:** August 14, 2012, 12:09 PM »

You obviously didn't watch the videos...

The kind of suckage he is talking about has nothing to do with the benefits of one OS over another, but things that affect the Open Source movement, philosophy, and community as a whole. The points he makes apply to the BSDs as well as Linux.

Tuxman · « **Reply #5 on:** August 14, 2012, 12:12 PM »

Right, I didn't.

f0dder · « **Reply #6 on:** August 14, 2012, 12:27 PM »

"How to fix Linux's sucking": Install BSD. Done.
-Tuxman (August 14, 2012, 03:46 AM)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

That was a nice laugh, thanks :-)

app103 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 14, 2012, 02:04 PM »

"Windows 8 is just a web page."

LOL!

You obviously didn't watch the videos...

The kind of suckage he is talking about has nothing to do with the benefits of one OS over another, but things that affect the Open Source movement, philosophy, and community as a whole. The points he makes apply to the BSDs as well as Linux.
-Edvard (August 14, 2012, 12:09 PM)

Some of his points apply to Windows, too. Things that affect OS and software development of any type, not just open source.

40hz · « **Reply #8 on:** August 14, 2012, 02:14 PM »

"How to fix Linux's sucking": Install BSD. Done.
-Tuxman (August 14, 2012, 03:46 AM)
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

That was a nice laugh, thanks :-)

-f0dder (August 14, 2012, 12:27 PM)

Would that it were that simple... $:-\$

Tuxman · « **Reply #9 on:** August 14, 2012, 02:22 PM »

It is. Why shouldn't it?
Don't use Linux, problem solved.

Edvard · « **Reply #10 on:** August 14, 2012, 02:53 PM »

Some of his points apply to Windows, too. Things that affect OS and software development of any type, not just open source.

Of course, his opinions and arguments could be adapted to apply to any OS and software, but in the context of what he's talking about, there are issues specific to the Open Source model that are actually hindering development and adoption; barriers that Windows and Mac just don't have, due to the cultures specific to them.

It pains me to say it, but much of the solution revolves around (you guessed it) money. Yes, Linux (and the BSDs) have a solid kernel, robust toolset and some of the most innovative (and often ugliest) software to be found, but it could be so much better if we could break away from the mistaken assumption that a bunch of hobbyist programmers putting in their patches every other weekend is going to produce amazing software in anything like a timely manner. So far, it's worked to a point, and it's a lovely romantic ideal, but we've proven to ourselves that if what we REALLY want is quality software, a team of paid programmers working full-time can multiply that effort SO much more it's ridiculous to argue otherwise, which is a large part of Mr. Lunduke's point, which I mostly agree with.

Mostly.

40hz · « **Reply #11 on:** August 14, 2012, 04:05 PM »

it could be so much better if we could break away from the mistaken assumption that a bunch of hobbyist programmers putting in their patches every other weekend is going to produce amazing software in anything like a timely manner. So far, it's worked to a point, and it's a lovely romantic ideal, but we've proven to ourselves that if what we REALLY want is quality software, a team of paid programmers working full-time can multiply that effort SO much more it's ridiculous to argue otherwise, which is a large part of Mr. Lunduke's point, which I mostly agree with.
-Edvard (August 14, 2012, 02:53 PM)

I think that exactly nails the issue. There's an old saying in IT circles that the first 90% of a development project consumes the first 90% of the budget - and the final 10% of the project consumes another 90% of the budget. Fancy way of saying it's that last bit of finishing, testing, and documentation that separates the more professional projects from the rest. And that's where the "free"open model tends to break down - during the endgame, the demarcation point between "good enough" and awesome.

No easy answer for how to do it because half the time we don't know what we need until somebody shows us the first version. And without the unpaid part-time coders, most of what we have in the NIX world would have never seen the light of day if only company and paid programmers were involved. Because they have to cost justify their involvement, whereas what I prefer to think of as the "passionate" rather than "amateur" coders can just have at it. And thank all that is good in this universe for it. Because it has made a difference even if it's become fashionable in some quarters to be "above it all" and dismiss the efforts of others simply because what's happening doesn't exactly fit in with their own view of things.

I respect comments by folks like Bryan Lunduke. Because he deals with the reality of the situation. And because people like him put something back into the Linux community. Or at least something more than the usual pot shots and Monday morning quarterbacking you get in many other places.

barney · « **Reply #12 on:** August 14, 2012, 04:31 PM »

Been staying out of this - not really qualified to hold a valid opinion - but 40hz and Edvard triggered me, and I'm really curious 'bout somethin': donations.

I cannot help but wonder how donations to the Linux community [of coders] are handled. Anyone - without derailing the topic - have a handle on that? It strikes me as an important part of the equation, open source or no.

Donations at DC are simple: donate to the site, or donate to an individual for solving a problem. But I can perceive some complexities when donating to a community rather than to individuals. Slush fund? Server time? Hire a specific person for a particularly difficult/complex bit of code?

Don't mind making the donations - best I can do to support the effort(s) of the people involved in doing the creation/innovation/work - but cannot help but wonder how they are handled $:-\$ .

40hz · « **Reply #13 on:** August 14, 2012, 05:37 PM »

^"Linux" is not really one community. Nor is there a formal central clearinghouse for donations to F/OSS although there has been some talk of doing one. But except for things like the kernal (i.e. what Linux actually is) or some of the really big things like Gnome or KDE, it's pretty much run on a project by project basis. You'd have to check the info on a project's website to find out who is running what and how.

Edvard · « **Reply #14 on:** August 14, 2012, 06:42 PM »

^+1

Most projects that have their own page will have a big "Donate" button on their site, and sites like SourceForge where many of these projects are hosted have a donation portal as well.

kyrathaba · « **Reply #15 on:** August 14, 2012, 07:06 PM »

When I find a Linux distro that installs and automagically detects and connects to my wireless internet access point (the way both WinXP and 7 did), I'll consider learning it.

40hz · « **Reply #16 on:** August 14, 2012, 08:46 PM »

When I find a Linux distro that installs and automagically detects and connects to my wireless internet access point (the way both WinXP and 7 did), I'll consider learning it.
-kyrathaba (August 14, 2012, 07:06 PM)

Blame the wireless card manufacturers, geographically varying licenses, and IP laws for that.

Many distros used to include wireless support right out of the box. But they've pretty much all stopped doing it more recently.

Because distros can't control where they get installed, unless the drivers are given to them with an unrestricted international and uniform license they can't include certain drivers by default. They can, however, be loaded quite easily after the initial installation. Most modern distros will even identify the drivers you need and offer to install them - but only after you accept the manufacturer's license agreement on the splash page that appears. Which leads to the ridiculous situation where the last time I loaded Linux on a laptop, I had to connect to the web using a CAT-5 cable in order to get access to the wireless drivers the distro suggested I install. Once that was done less than a minute later, it fired right up (without the need of a reboot), and found my WAP. All I needed to do was give it my WPA2 key and I was set to go. I've been completely wireless ever since. Sound stupid? If so, that's because it is. But that's the world we've created for ourselves. Because there is no practical or technical reason for any of this nonsense. Only legal nonsense masquerading as reasons.
$:-\$
-------------------

I'm also glad you'll "consider learning" Linux when it finally works exactly the way you think it should. However, since what you want Linux to do involves proprietary hardware drivers, I wouldn't worry about needing to learn it anytime soon. Attorneys get paid by the hour. And it's all billable time as far as many of them are concerned.

mahesh2k · « **Reply #17 on:** August 14, 2012, 09:17 PM »

Wireless support for debian and it;s child distros (ubuntu, mint etc) works just fine in india. If it works in india, I wonder what stops it from not working in united states. Hell, not even so called unixes, BSDs have this much plug and play support for the internet devices here in India. Almost any 3G/4G device in India is supported under debian without much hassle.

I don't know why wireless access should be an issue. If Indians are in position to switch to linux despite slow network and other hardware issues, I don't think people in US and Canada will have any trouble on connectivity end. Most of the time If it's USB device plugged for connectivity, there is hardly anything you have to worry about it on linux.

barney · « **Reply #18 on:** August 14, 2012, 09:44 PM »

Wireless support for debian and it;s child distros (ubuntu, mint etc) works just fine in india. If it works in india, I wonder what stops it from not working in united states. Hell, not even so called unixes, BSDs have this much plug and play support for the internet devices here in India. Almost any 3G/4G device in India is supported under debian without much hassle.

I don't know why wireless access should be an issue. If Indians are in position to switch to linux despite slow network and other hardware issues, I don't think people in US and Canada will have any trouble on connectivity end. Most of the time If it's USB device plugged for connectivity, there is hardly anything you have to worry about it on linux.
-mahesh2k (August 14, 2012, 09:17 PM)

While I can appreciate the sentiment (and am somewhat envious, btw), that's not always the case here. While I suspect it is provider dependent, I don't really have anything to support that opinion. Nonetheless, what I (and many others, according to forae & blogs) have experienced is that it requires significant effort to get wireless- or even cabled - networking working (somehow, networking working just sounds wrong

). Not everyone has that problem, of course, but may of us do. In fact, I've on occasion had problems getting even USB to work. Now, that may be due to the really crappy network interface that exists in the US, I don't know. Or it could be OEM dissuasion, again, I don't know. (But I did have a conversation with tech support once that pretty much implied that if it ain't Win or Mac, it ain't at all.) But it's a fact that many folk here have significant troubles with installation.

zridling · « **Reply #19 on:** August 14, 2012, 11:03 PM »

Oh jeez, that was hilarious. "Beefy Miracle."

mahesh2k · « **Reply #20 on:** August 14, 2012, 11:25 PM »

Wireless support for debian and it;s child distros (ubuntu, mint etc) works just fine in india. If it works in india, I wonder what stops it from not working in united states. Hell, not even so called unixes, BSDs have this much plug and play support for the internet devices here in India. Almost any 3G/4G device in India is supported under debian without much hassle.

I don't know why wireless access should be an issue. If Indians are in position to switch to linux despite slow network and other hardware issues, I don't think people in US and Canada will have any trouble on connectivity end. Most of the time If it's USB device plugged for connectivity, there is hardly anything you have to worry about it on linux.
-mahesh2k (August 14, 2012, 09:17 PM)

While I can appreciate the sentiment (and am somewhat envious, btw), that's not always the case here. While I suspect it is provider dependent, I don't really have anything to support that opinion. Nonetheless, what I (and many others, according to forae & blogs) have experienced is that it requires significant effort to get wireless- or even cabled - networking working (somehow, networking working just sounds wrong ). Not everyone has that problem, of course, but may of us do. In fact, I've on occasion had problems getting even USB to work. Now, that may be due to the really crappy network interface that exists in the US, I don't know. Or it could be OEM dissuasion, again, I don't know. (But I did have a conversation with tech support once that pretty much implied that if it ain't Win or Mac, it ain't at all.) But it's a fact that many folk here have significant troubles with installation.
-barney (August 14, 2012, 09:44 PM)

Barney, I don't go with the views from the comments and blogs, however I do feel their frustration. These days I do the testing for linux on my own before making strong opinion. The thing with linux commentary on the internet is that whether it's windows fan or mac fanatic, they will always think linux is just not ready or they will just remark on linux for their own agenda. I do understand that there are still some issues with old hardware but I personally found that windows also lacks for supporting them in the same way.

As for the device support, here is on example. Windows XP, Vista and 7 were tested in aztech corp for the network modules on device testing, here in india. You know the worst part of this testing? None of the ISP's in india are included in the list of supported networks for the last 3 versions of windows. We have region specific version on sale here but none of these versions list ISP and telecom providers here. You want to know the funny part now? Get a copy of debian distro or child distro like mint or ubuntu. When you go on installing the distro, It will list all the telecom operators in India. It also autoconnects to the network if you're plugging in android devices or any other phone with USB support. One personal example I can give you here is that my old Dlink modem is unusable on any modern windows as it lacks the driver support. I just connected that modem to ubuntu 12.04 and it is working fine.

That's not all, pick any new device from the amazon.com (e.g. Kindle, nook, ipad )and it will detect the device via USB just fine. Except ipad, most of the android devices are linux underneath. As valve and id software going into the linux area, I see only improvement from the hardware side.

I am not saying there are not any problems with linux but windows and mac are just getting worst for support here in this region, despite the fact that large number of testing work for them is done here, which is shame.

barney · « **Reply #21 on:** August 14, 2012, 11:51 PM »

I am not saying there are not any problems with linux but windows and mac are just getting worst for support here in this region, despite the fact that large number of testing work for them is done here, which is shame.
-mahesh2k (August 14, 2012, 11:25 PM)

My point was not that Win or Mac is better - personally, any OS that works to do what I need done is acceptable - just that there does seem to be a bias here, and it's not always on the user side. I've been shut down for using a *nix OS in the past - before I knew to check out providers instead of using the cheapest one

.

Yes hardware support has significantly improved, as has ISP support. But we were discussing why past experiences have alienated a number of US users. I speak only from personal knowledge ... I'm not judging any OS, nor any particular hardware (although I could), just pointing out what has happened in the past here to a significant number of folk.

I haven't had any USB problems with any of the last six (6) or seven (7) distros I've tried, but my first try at Ubuntu was a disaster as far as USB was concerned. And wireless was nonexistent. That's not a complaint, it's a simple report. While I've watched Linux grow in the US asfewartw4eqfgdgfdoasja'kja[seskaqFJDAowefrwE';Fa

40hz · « **Reply #22 on:** August 15, 2012, 08:40 AM »

In some respects hardware support is better under Linux than Windows with mainstream distros. You certainly have better support for many 'legacy' devices and printers. And it was nice plugging in a Canon USB scanner and having it just work with Mint recently. Which was surprising since the software Canon supplied with the device was a nightmare to get installed and working properly under XP.

But Barney raises a significant point which I'll risk summarizing as : Once burned - twice shy. And that is one PR issue the Linux world needs to deal with far better than it has to date.

Unfortunately, for the Linux community, Ubuntu's way of dealing with it is by distancing itself from the larger Linux community. If you go to their current homepage they now refer to their product as The Ubuntu Operating System. Not Linux-based Ubuntu. Just the Ubuntu operating system:

Fast, secure and stylishly simple, the Ubuntu operating system is used by 20 million people worldwide every day.

Want to know how they explain why it's free? See below - notice there's no mention up front about the FSF - but there is mention of IBM, Google, Wikipedia, and Mozilla.

Ubuntu is brilliant. It's no wonder our users ask how all this can be free. The answer is simple.

It’s open source.

Our global community is made up of thousands of people who want to help build the best open-source operating system in the world. They share their time and skills to make sure that Ubuntu keeps getting better and better. From IBM to Google, Firefox to Wikipedia – some of today's best software is based on an open-source model. Shared efforts. Shared principles. No cost.

If you follow the llnk for more information, you get a page where Ubuntu provides a summary of open source principles and philosophy which they refer to as Our Philosophy. And also make mention of their (as in Ubuntu's) global community. True, there are links to the FSF and OSI buried further down 'below the fold.' But again, this is another example of Ubuntu assuming ownership (or strongly implying their ownership) of something it would have been more honest to say they adopted or embraced.

ZD's Steve Vaughan-Nichols did an op-ed piece recently where he looked at this phenomenon. He concludes that it's simply a pragmatic response to dealing with a negative public perception that can no longer be changed:

You see this isn't about reality. It's about perception. Canonical and Google rather than try to fight how Linux is seen by most people and the Microsoft trolls who do their best to keep the Linux lies alive, have chosen to dodge the Linux brand issue entirely.

Hence, Google emphasizes Android and Chrome OS and Canonical talks about Ubuntu. They're doing this because this works. By doing this, they avoid all the negative FUD that Microsoft fans and trolls keep throwing at Linux and they get to set the conversation. My wife, Clara Boza, a branding expert and former CMO, tells me that this is smart marketing and that it works. Given Android's success and that Chrome OS and Ubuntu seem to be among the most popular Linux distributions, I think she's right.

He then goes on to say:

For those of who are Linux fans, it's annoying. We should keep in mind though that the end goal is getting Linux into the hands of users. If they happen to call it Android, Chrome OS, or Ubuntu is that really such a bad thing? I don't think so.

Actually, it is a bad thing. Very bad. It fragments the larger community and undermines the social contract. And it also sets the stage for Canonical, Red Hat (and more recently SUSE) to start doing things like cut their own separate deal (or planned deal) with Microsoft to address UEFI/SecureBoot concerns.

But all this has been previously discussed at DoCo, and the current moves towards accommodating Microsoft are better left for a separate thread.

And I'm really starting to get quite disgusted about all this, so I'm gonna stop writing for now.

I+give+up+_47ff4003a8484f727eddbb21cc51088a.png

I+give+up+_47ff4003a8484f727eddbb21cc51088a.png

Later!

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #23 on:** August 15, 2012, 09:36 AM »

Hmm, I'm in the group of once-excited by Linux, and now while I respect it, I'm just worn out and will stay with Windows. Speaking of Ubuntu, *they* were responsible for some of my worst "burned four times" experiences! (Details some other time).

For me it was about the reasons *why* to consider moving to Linux. Blue Screens really don't happen much anymore, some companies are using more and more complicated proprietary software that only exists on Windows, and updates just seem to be really hard and that bothers me. Having to write over with the new version of the OS just feels wrong to me. And in Ubuntu's case they come really really fast!

Another reason is social. I agree with those who think that Vista could have been a great Linux opportunity. Instead it just drifted away somewhere, and Win7 mostly got the job done. I think we even have one more chance with the UI-formerly-known-as-Metro. But I don't see the tidal wave of momentum on the brink of overtaking Windows just yet.

So part of me just wants to use my energy on something else until the "popular opinion" just "Decides" that the time has come for Linux.

40hz · « **Reply #24 on:** August 15, 2012, 12:48 PM »

So part of me just wants to use my energy on something else until the "popular opinion" just "Decides" that the time has come for Linux.
-TaoPhoenix (August 15, 2012, 09:36 AM)

I'm not so much driven by making Linux the dominant desktop OS like some (fewer and fewer) in the Linux community are.

I'm more concerned with preserving an open computing environment in both software and hardware. Because left to their own devices, all the industrial dragons (i.e. Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, et al) are doing their best to bring about the passage of what can only be described as a computing 'enclosure' movement.

So to me it's not at all important that Linux triumphs - whatever that means. With technology, "best in class" is no guarantee of massive public adoption. At least if history is anything to go by. And Linux is far from perfect. I'm more concerned Linux stay alive and be usable on generally available hardware. Hardware that doesn't need to be hacked or jailbroken before you're allowed to do what you want with it.

I'm not "fighting" to "convert" anybody. Linux is just a tool - so why argue? Use whatever you like best AFAIC. However, it is very important to me, and I think the world in general, that Linux (or something like it) continue to thrive and be available. And above all - still be usable.

Because the alternative is dangerous.

Personal computing let the genie out of the bottle and empowered the common people. Now there are forces at work which are doing their damnedest to put it all back in the bottle before these same 'common' people start talking too much, asking too many questions, and ultimately demanding too much accountability from those who are running things.

Linux and the whole F/OSS movement is about far bigger things than just personal computing. At its heart, it's really a movement for fundamental and positive societal change. It just so happens to present itself in the guise of a technology initiative. Those (and there are many) who only see it as '"free software" miss most of what's driving it.