Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Editorial Software Linux Business Linux

Linux Needs More Haters 617

Posted by Soulskill
from the dem's-fightin'-woids dept.
Corrupt brings us a ZDNet column by Jeremy Allison, who says Linux could benefit from more "tough love" in order to improve its functionality and popularity. Excerpting: "As Elie Wiesel said, 'the opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference.' LinuxHater really doesn't hate Linux, despite the name. No one takes that much time to point out flaws in a product that they completely loathe and despise. The complaints are really cries of frustration with a system that just doesn't quite do what is desired (albeit well disguised). A friend pointed out to me that the best way to parse LinuxHaters blog is to treat it as a series of bug reports. A perl script could probably parse out the useful information from them and log them as technical bug reports to the projects LinuxHater is writing about. Deep down, I believe LinuxHater really loves Linux, and wants it to succeed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Needs More Haters

Comments Filter:
  • by bsDaemon (87307) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:28PM (#24263139)

    Slashdotters must all be MS shareholders and Vista early adopters!

  • by Tim Ward (514198) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:32PM (#24263193) Homepage

    I "hate Linux", to the extent that I use it as little and as infrequently as possible. I certainly don't like it enough to want to spend time, that I could otherwise spend on real life, telling people why I don't like it!

  • I hate Linux ...OK, you got me, I'm just kidding.
  • by Digana (1018720) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:39PM (#24263293)

    LinuxHater's blog is aweseome, and I say this as someone who deeply loves Linux and GNU and all that is based on them. His criticisms are very well thought-out, not just stupid name calling, but clear, effective, technical, and explicit complaints about everything that is wrong with free software. He coats it with sardonic and bitter vitriol, yet beneath that tough exterior, there are the complaints of someone who has evidently spent a lot of time poking around the system, down to its gritty internals, and has found everything that could be improved about it.

    Even Miguel de Icaza loves LinuxHater's blog [tirania.org]. I recommend that any free software enthusiast spend some good time reading the blog. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll wonder how you can make it all better.

    • by Hatta (162192) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:27PM (#24263815) Journal

      I can't agree. Look at Friday's post, no real constructive criticism there. Just HAHA look at the lusers!

      Now look at Thursdays, complaining about too much choice. He's ignoring the fact that every desktop distro makes a working set of default choices. Whether you use Ubuntu, Mandriva, Xandros, or whatever, you'll have a desktop environment, browser, music player, etc, etc chosen for you. And just what does he think we're going to do about having too much choice? Tell people they can't code window managers any more? Again, this is not constructive criticism.

      Back to Wednesday, again just poking fun.

      On tuesday still nothing useful. Google using linux isn't a reason for you to, sure I buy that. But it's not a reason not to either.

      Virtual desktops, I dunno about OS X, but he suggests VirtuaWin for windows. UGH! It's incredibly slow, it doesn't guarantee the order of windows after a desktop change, and it doesn't support mouse wheeling. Makes you wonder if he's used virtual desktops for any length of tim on any OS.

      Make uninstall, that's what autopackage is for. Enough said. Most of the rest is just arguing that Windows isn't all that bad, which is true, but it's not a criticism of Linux.

      Monday, is more of the same. He does a good job knocking down arguments against windows, but very little actually criticising linux. Which is to be expected really, Linux is at least as good an OS as windows, the only place it really lacks is in application support. And if he wants to fix that, he should be arguing for linux, not against it.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:30PM (#24263847)

      His criticisms are very well thought-out, not just stupid name calling, but clear, effective, technical, and explicit complaints about everything that is wrong with free software.

      Oh really? Are we talking about the same blogger that writes gems like this one?:

      One sure thing that a luser will say to you when you criticize his shitty operating system goes something along the lines of "but at least I don't get any viruses."

      Good for you dude. I don't get any viruses from your mom either. I'm protected. So please cease and desist your blabbering.

      Classy all the way. And what an insight.

    • by orasio (188021) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @02:02PM (#24264147) Homepage

      Miguel de Icaza is not that much of a free software fan, though.
      I think of them like the Count Dooku of software development. The guy has a vision, and doesn't care about how to get there, even if it means putting all of us at risk.

  • just one thing (Score:5, Informative)

    by callmetheraven (711291) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:40PM (#24263315)
    The only thing wrong with linux is lack of availability of 3rd party shrink-wrap type applications and games. I would love to give up XP, but linux can't run the video editing software that I need and games that I want.
    • Re:just one thing (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Nimey (114278) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:30PM (#24263849) Homepage Journal

      It'd be really helpful if more distros complied with the FHS and LSB out of the box.

    • Re:just one thing (Score:5, Interesting)

      by howlingmadhowie (943150) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @03:34PM (#24264957)
      i'm not sure that it is 'the only thing wrong with linux', as i think that linux as a distribution has a number of other flaws, but it is remarkable to think that this is where the problem now is. after years of hearing about the complexity and command-line intricacies of gnu/linux as being the showstoppers, i'm reading more and more posts from people saying things like 'ubuntu is just as easy or even easier to use than vista and it has better hardware support, but it's a pain getting WoW running on it'.

      do you think it is fair to say that if the next big game was available on ubuntu for example, and for the sake of argument, let's throw the next version of photoshop in there as well, we could see a fairly large movement towards linux distributions on the desktop?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bcrowell (177657)

      The only thing wrong with linux is lack of availability of 3rd party shrink-wrap type applications and games. I would love to give up XP, but linux can't run the video editing software that I need and games that I want.

      I use linux as my only OS. I don't agree that lack of shinkwrapped apps is the only problem. In fact, I don't perceive the lack of shinkwrapped apps as a problem at all. I'm not into gaming, and as far as the rest of the software that I see on the aisles of retail stores, my usual thought w

  • by HangingChad (677530) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:41PM (#24263321) Homepage

    One of the reasons I like Linux so much is that there's so little to complain about. Everything just works. Occasionally there's a driver hunt or compatibility issue, getting a scanner to work, but overall, once it's set up and working, smooth sailing.

    That was the way Windows used to be. Everything would install and just work, while the Linux tinkerers spent hours chasing down compatibility issues and combing through HCL's. But Vista changed that perception and the very time Linux was making progress in big leaps.

    Five years ago if you wanted a smooth install and minimal fuss you picked Windows 2000 or XP. Now you install Ubuntu or buy a Mac. The reality is probably a little more complex but the perception certainly has changed.

    • Er, I think you need to go and read the Linuxhater blog. You may find your experience is not typical.

      My current status is: I installed Ubuntu Hardy to try it after giving up on Debian 5 years ago. It's pretty nice, but whenever I take my Thinkpad out of its dock, it crashes. Windows is much better: whenever I plug the Thinkpad into the dock, it crashes.

      :-( /me hates all computers equally

    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:20PM (#24263729) Homepage

      One of the reasons I like Linux so much is that there's so little to complain about. Everything just works. Occasionally there's a driver hunt or compatibility issue, getting a scanner to work, but overall, once it's set up and working, smooth sailing.

      I don't mean to offend you or anyone else, but I think you might be a bit overly-optimistic. There are a lot of valid complaints about Linux. Not that I see a lot of constant show-stopper bugs in major distros or anything, but that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of smaller problems, annoyances, and missed opportunities to do things better.

      I'd say Linux does a very good job at loads of things *relative other currently available operating systems* (i.e. other operating systems have their share of problems, too). But computing in general still has a lot of room for improvement. If any Linux developers out there think Linux is perfect and feel like they're running out of things to improve, let me know. I can help you find things.

      That was the way Windows used to be. Everything would install and just work, while the Linux tinkerers spent hours chasing down compatibility issues and combing through HCL's.

      I'll grant you that Windows was a good desktop OS for its time, back around 2000. At the time, nothing was doing a better job of meeting most users' needs. But it has always been far from perfect, and each version has had plenty of technical/design problems..

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AndGodSed (968378)

        I agree with parent.

        That said - there is no such thing as a perfect, trouble free OS. Every OS has it's warts.

        I am an IT manager - and Linux Geek - that currently works in an all Windows department in our company.

        A few things stand out for me:

        1) Becoming a Linux geek has taught me so much about computers that the techies under me constantly come to me for troubleshooting tips - not that I am so much better, they are all new guys that I need to "grow" in the company.
        2) I constantly, on a daily basis, need to

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      ...once it's set up

      Now I use Linux on a headless box to manage my network connections but even that took some doing. The difference in difficulty in setting up a Linux box and a Mac is often quite clear. Sometimes linux is easy to set up. Sometimes it "Just Works" but I think we need to get that up to like 90% of the time.

      I'm a big fan of Linux but there's some pretty obvious deficiencies and many Linux aficionados are often the first to pull the so-what-it-shouldn't-be-easy-but-there's-a-way-to-do-it
  • by LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:46PM (#24263391) Homepage

    Use the app from this previous article [slashdot.org] to scan a few popular Linux-hating blogs' articles and comments and maybe you've got yourself a pro-active user feedback tool. Maybe.

  • Spot on (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Tofflos (942124)

    I think he's right about LinuxHater and right that we should be thankful for that kind of criticism. Pointing out flaws in a more public manner and in a way that makes it accessible to a larger audience can help shape opinion and get the flaws fixed.

    Sure, LinuxHater could try to fix the bugs himself but I think that would be a lot less effective than what he's doing right now.

  • by MobyDisk (75490) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:55PM (#24263465) Homepage

    I know lots of smart developers who have tried Linux and ported apps to it, just to expand their knowledge of the operating system and learn how to port stuff and to keep their skills up-to-date. But most of them fallback to Windows. The more pragmatic ones switch to OS X because it is just like a Unix OS, but with far greater usability.

    At one point I kept a blog of all the troubles I had with using Linux. Most of the items were really simple things that made it very difficult to use. But often even constructive comments were met with disdain, so I gave up. No sense in complaining to a deaf audience.

    This all comes back to the zealous Linux pragmatism where truly constructive criticism is turned into that with-us-or-against-us mentality.

    • My Linux Experience (Score:3, Interesting)

      by KenSeymour (81018)

      I count myself in the group of developers that used Linux for a few years, then switched back to Windows.

      I had and have one PC at home. To run Linux, I set that machine up dual or triple boot. I was running Red Hat for a while until they changed it into Fedora. I worked with Fedora for a while, but they had a bug with dual booting that they would not only not fix, but called it a feature. I got as far as the version of Fedora that had SELinux in it. Someone told me "Debian is better." I had that as a

  • OS X (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dan dan the dna man (461768) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:59PM (#24263503) Homepage Journal

    OS X is the 'tough love' that Linux needs. I use Linux on the server (although I have a rack of Xserves too) and there's a reason I am happy with it there (unlike OS X).

    On the desktop? Well I use a Mac. And I don't think I will ever go back (in the interests of fairness this is being posted from my 'Games and things' XP laptop).

    I love the fact Linux is dynamic, and open source. I really do. I don't like the fact that it doesn't seem to 'evolve'. The fragementation of WM's, distro's etc. never actually seems to weed things out. What we never end up with is a 'de facto' solution.

    People argue that choice is good. I'm sure it is. But the reason that Windows and OS X still beat Linux on the desktop experience is because they are standardised - there just aren't alternatives. And OS X is a better 'desktop Unix', so as a person who wants that, where else am I meant to go? If nothing else KDE 4 would drive me away... yuck.

    I did use Linux on the desktop. For several years. I only tried OS X on a whim.

    I don't hate Linux, but I don't think I'm alone. Go to a confernce these days (I'm an academic) and I used to see people booting into myriad versions of Linux as they opened their laptops. These people are now in a minority, as the Apple logo is raised in unison at the beginning of any talk.

    Fanboy? Maybe.

    • Re:OS X (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:49PM (#24264019)

      Sigh, another heap of bullshit. There are really three simple reasons why Linux have difficulties becoming mainstream in the environments you describe. NONE of those have anything with any of that "standardization" bullshit you seem to believe in.

      Reason #1. Linux doesn't generally come pre-installed. If you want it, you've got to install it yourself. Usually after you've already paid for another OS. Don't have time, or can't be bothered? Get your ass into the folder your OEM have decided for you to be in.

      Reason #2. All OEMs fall over themselves to get stuff working with Windows - in the case of Apple, obviously they fix it for you. Not so with Linux. In fact there are plenty of OEMs who seems to deliberatly try to make life difficult to use anything but the original, OEM approved OS.

      Reason #3. ISVs reluctant to try new markets until it's obvious that they are on the verge of becoming obsoleted. (Don't feed me that "all distros are incompatible" line, it's horse shit). In fact, the way for instance Adobe behaves, one might actually start to wonder if there aren't cheques coming in from certain parties in order to assure that some applications stay off the Linux platform.

      These three reasons are basically all there is to it. If Linux had shipped pre-installed, and OEMs didn't put obstacles in the way, I bet we would see a lot more of it. And if some ISVs actually grew some backbone, instead of cowardly assisting with the vendor lock-in, we'd probably see even more of it. It has NOTHING to do with the fact that some people prefer a wm, some gnome and yet others prefer kde on their desktop. Just get your damned libraries in line, and you're home. Anyone with a IQ above that of a log can see that.

    • Re:OS X (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Magic5Ball (188725) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @02:35PM (#24264437)

      The main difference I've found between commercially developing for Linux and commercially for OS X is that suggestions for improvement generally get the response "that's a problem with [other part of the stack]", where the [other part of the stack] gives the same form of response, and the pointers rarely dereference to anyone who takes responsibility or ownership of the issue.

      A fine example currently is asking for modal dialogs to be dismissable on 400 px tall screens of UMPCs ("Please let me scroll the dialog, or locate the OK/Cancel/Apply/Help buttons on screen where I can see and click them"). The echo chamber of "talk to (app | xorg | GTK | Intel | Java | Nvidia | distribution | libc | vendor | etc.)" really turns me off of wanting to help any of them resolve the issue. As a developer on Linux (but with OSI Layer 2/3 stuff, rather than GUI things), I could probably spend a week or two to figure out how all of those pieces interact (without deeply understanding the design philosophy or project plans) and make patches that would work on my current setup, but that would generate significantly more regression testing and QA load than would be required if the patches came from in-house where the developers are already intimately familiar with their own code. Also, as one of the advantages of a package management system is supposed to be that it all gets taken care of for me, I have no interest in maintaining my own versions of app, X, GTK, etc, nor do I want to spend a day each understanding the 32 to 200 KB spec files that build those packages, nor am I interested in waiting 3 months to year before the fix makes it into the non-beta parts of the distributions I might use.

      Now, ask grandma to change the screen resolution back to 800x400 (using a dialog the entirety of which she can't see or access) after she experiments with plugging a regular monitor into her new eeePC (or whatever UMPC the banks are giving away these days) and it stays mirrored at the new resolution after the experiment. It's unreasonable to expect that random non-technical user would want or need to understand that the entire stack around the problem even exists, let alone attempt to fix it.

      By contrast, if I encounter an issue manifesting in CoreFoo, Cocoa, some kext or library or wherever else on OS X, Apple will offer to take ownership of it even if it isn't directly their problem (and then work on it in the background), other vendors/developers in the stack will at least acknowledge if not fully investigate the problem in the test case(s) submitted, and random other developers in the same space will be thankful for the new knowledge instead of responding with RTFM or its analogues. Granted, fixes in OS X still take weeks to a couple of months to widely roll out, but that's still faster than many distributions update their stable packages.

      And then there are (the comparatively few) great OSS people like Tim Waugh, who knows the (printing) stack up and down, and responds with a reasonable fix or workaround within 48 hours, even though the problem is not in his part of the stack, regardless of who's customer you are. Plus, you'll usually get some insights by responding to his "I'm curious about what you're doing with this" follow-up.

  • by jake_fehr (469788) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @12:59PM (#24263505)

    I read the article and I thought, "Well, that sounds like a good idea." Too often when anyone mentions ANY of GNU/Linux's shortcomings (which, to be fair, are far less in number than Windows's), they are labelled a troll and are either attacked or ignored.

    So what happens? The comments for this story include gems like "Not that much to complain about" and "Linux + GPL what is there not to love."

    Legitimately easy-to-use GNU/Linux distributions such as Ubuntu didn't happen because of the GNU/Linux Yes-Men out there. It happened because the people at Canonical listened to complaints from people like GNU/Linux haters and tried to address the issues.

    Or for that matter, flip the situation around. It seems that many users on Slashdot love GNU/Linux and hate Windows. If someone wrote an article saying that Microsoft should listen to the issues of Windows haters to help improve their product, wouldn't you think it was a good idea?

  • by 32771 (906153) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:01PM (#24263533) Journal

    it just chooses its friends wisely.

    I mean there are always alternatives, you could even use MacOS. (not windows though)

    I do have a bit of an issue with some developments. Some supposedly user friendly Linux installations
    think they should also be fool proof. Like certain NAS solutions, or maybe even Ubuntu which I'm using right now. There really are machine generated and machine controlled config files in /etc. To control the config file control process you have to edit certain configuration files in a hard to find location.

    People, this is counterintuitive! Call me old fashioned but if I change a config file in /etc I mean it. I don't need some clippy like demon thingy to tell me that I can only edit its own configuration. It should be able to read the darn /etc file if it is that smart. If /etc isn't expressive enough invent something else and don't leave old stuff around.

    There you go, got your two minutes of hate now?

  • by reallocate (142797) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:10PM (#24263647)

    Linux lovers should be grateful that anyone bothers to provide free criticism. Commercial vendors spend big bucks on focus sessions to acquire the same information.

    One troubling trait exhibited by some Linux devotees is their insistence on responding to any criticism of the software by touting it's free software/open source roots. Frankly, that's little consolation to someone who's pointing out why they're unhappy with the software. Why should the model used to develop and distribute software mollify users when they see inadequacies in that software?

    Of course, linked to that is the really annoying challenge to "Just fix it yourself! You've got the source!" That's an absurd claim. It's either premised on a wish to rid the Linux community of anyone who is not a bona fide developer, or it is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to be a competent developer.

    Linux is a great OS and the best desktop distributions have nothing to hide. But, nothing ever gets better when people deliberately turn a blind eye to complaints.

    • by dargaud (518470) <slashdot2@nOsPAM.gdargaud.net> on Sunday July 20, 2008 @02:50PM (#24264575) Homepage

      Of course, linked to that is the really annoying challenge to "Just fix it yourself! You've got the source!" That's an absurd claim.

      Yup. I write, among other things, device drivers under Linux for a living. But each time I take a Linux graphical app and try to make some changes to it, it fails. Wrong compiler setup. Wrong libraries. Wrong rpm. Wrong system config. Wrong wrongness.

      It's to the point that there are only 3 types of Linux progs that work: the one that comes with the system (and its updates), the simple "./configure; make; make install" and the kind I write myself. Any of that "fix it yourself" is crap.

    • by Draek (916851) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @05:21PM (#24265745)

      The problem however is that most free criticism sucks. I mean, look around, most of the criticism towards distros is that there are too many of them, arguing that instead There Should Be Only One(tm), ala MacOSX, completely missing the point of Free Software.

      Yes, there are a few sane minds among them, like the ones who argue for Free Desktop standards to be more widely implemented, and for the large DEs to standardize it first, implement it later instead of the other way around, but those voices are quickly lost in the noise of those who want Linux to turn into a second-rate copy of a propietary OS.

      And then you've got all the morons who believe that the Free in "Free Software" means "Free an in free labor", quickly proceeding to troll $OSS_PROJECT_X's forums about how the developers are so lazy since they hadn't yet fixed the bug he reported *five minutes* after he had filed it, who are the cause that the "go fix it yourself" reply got so popular in the first place.

      So what's the best way to deal with it? beats me, but what's certain to me is that the current situation, of having so many people complain about idiotic things, is what's driving developers towards ignoring all non-dev users' requests, and that if we can find a way to deal with that, Free Software would improve at an even faster rate than it currently does.

      • by reallocate (142797) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @08:02PM (#24267155)

        Yes, but...

        Criticism garnered at professional focus groups isn't likely to differ from that garnered in the typical online Linux gripe session.

        Gripes from users may strike developers as something less than sane, but all of those people are saying something that matters to them. However silly or pointless a complaint might seem, it is something that may very probably keep someone from using Linux.

        In the commercial world, developers are not the only people with a voice in deciding which complaints are addressed and which are not. If management believes a complaint is hurting sales, I suspect it will be addressed, no matter how trivial or inane. Given their nature, many Linux development efforts may or may not mirror that behavior.

        (Anecdote: Once upon a time, I led a number of requirements gathering efforts for some software efforts as well as overseeing testing each iteration with users. At least 8 of 10 of their comments were repetitive, cosmetic, silly, etc. But, they established the baseline for the software's acceptability. Whatever I thought, or the developers thought, the users would have rejected the product if we had not addressed their complaints.)

        Finally, I think I have a reasonable view of the purpose of Free Software, but I'm convinced that the only users who take that into consideration are already Free Software converts. I.e., judging Linux from a Free Software point of view assures Linux remains a Free Software enthusiasm.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Americano (920576)

        The problem however is that most free criticism sucks. I mean, look around, most of the criticism towards distros is that there are too many of them, arguing that instead There Should Be Only One(tm), ala MacOSX, completely missing the point of Free Software.

        And perhaps Free Software is missing the point of the user criticism, too?

        When your users are complaining, they're telling you something. I always tell the people I work with - "don't give them strictly what they ask for, figure out what they *nee

  • by delire (809063) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:16PM (#24263701)
    If Jeremy is correct, then the author of Linux Haters has chosen what is possibly the least likely route to garnering interest from Linux developers. Which linux developer would consciously choose to read a blog that refers to them as a 'luser' incessantly from paragraph to paragraph.

    The 'benchmark' OS he seems to use as the basis of the bulk of his criticisms is OSX, an OS I find really frustrating to use (and I use it fairly often these days). If I were to start an OSX Haters on this basis should I expect the Aqua and XCode authors to read it daily in the interests of improving all the braindead things about both those aspects of OSX? Didn't think so.. Maybe the guy just has a crippling case of Internet Rabies induced by deep boredom and Jeremy's simply being a little generous..

    There are, afterall, blogs featuring meticulously prepared images of meals that people hated eating. Perhaps this blog is simply in the same vein; just another masochist whiling away the hours in public.

    Must be a slow news day.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Spy der Mann (805235)

      If Jeremy is correct, then the author of Linux Haters has chosen what is possibly the least likely route to garnering interest from Linux developers.

      I wouldn't be surprised if he turned out to be a former Linux enthusiast turned hater after all his complaints were answered with a "Fix it yourself" reply from arrogant devs.

  • by Maxo-Texas (864189) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:19PM (#24263719)

    This is important to learn in life. When you reject someone that loves you, then they hate you. As long as they hate you, they still love you.

    Once they don't care any more then it's over.

    It discovered this all on my own when going through a bad breakup so that part of the comment particularly leapt out from the page to me.

  • by TheModelEskimo (968202) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:21PM (#24263749)
    Lately it's become popular for Linux users and devs to profess their love and devotion for the Linux Hater. But I don't think they really get it. The author just propagates the same old "grandma can't use it" and "too much choice" and "developers should focus instead on XYZ" crap that you found on usenet years ago.

    The message is not simply, "Linux needs to improve," but rather "Linux will never be good enough."

    Most experienced Linux users probably have it in them to respond to inane trolls with precision and objectivity, but when a troll with a sense of humor, good writing skills, and some domain experience comes along, everybody cowers and plays along. Hey, the popular guy is here, everybody play cool.

    Too many Linux users are caught between their love for straightforwardness and cutting-edge technology on the one hand and their lust for popularity and respect on the other. Linux Hater is not here to make you laugh. He's not secretly using Linux and enjoying it. He's the guy who sold you out for cooler friends in tenth grade, idiots.
  • by plasmacutter (901737) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @01:40PM (#24263935)

    All distros must REQUIRE a graphic sudo dialogue system (a-la osx) in order to distribute a file manager.

    File managers are there to manage files, and not just on your own user space. There is nothing more annoying than having to drop to shell level and type furiously to do something which on mac can be done with a few drags and drops.

    Most people don't even know how to do that, and all they see is "operation not permitted".
    Think about that for a minute... Because there is no option to authenticate (out of the box), joe user is put through the same scenario with his files that you get put through when some company surprises you with a DRM scheme.

  • by crhylove (205956) <rhy@leperkhanz.com> on Sunday July 20, 2008 @02:02PM (#24264137) Homepage Journal

    I'll give fair crits.

    Let me say first and foremost, that I prefer booting into Ubuntu and using that as my daily driver. Sometimes I just can't though.

    Here is a list of short reasons why:

    Skype seems to be faster, and work better in w32. My video gets sent at higher resolution, and I can hear the other party better. Dunno why, this is just the case.

    7zip is screwed up in Linux. I installed a wine version, AND a native version, only the wine version will start and it flickers and won't let me select a package to extract. Making it unusable.

    Random crashes. I mean, probably as many or more as I get regularly in Windows, with the added inconvenience of ctrl+alt+bckspce not being near as good as ctrl+alt+delete, which brings up a handy task menu for me to clean up (usually).

    No two sound things going at once. Sometimes I like to put on mp3s, and THEN go kill people in Urban Terror. This is easy and works perfect in W32, but not in Ubuntu, I just get the mp3s, and NO sound in a game whilst they are playing.

    TVtime not recognizing my TV card. Dscaler turns on perfectly in Windows. So does TVtime in Ubuntu, but then the screen is blue and there is no menu for me to figure out what is wrong, either.

    Joost. Works in windows, not in Ubuntu. I'm sure partially Joost's fault, but still sad.

    Civilization 2. Best/funnest version of the game, will not play in wine even though it's like 10 years old.

    I like how Windows arranges it's GUI, start button, quicklaunch, then task list, then systray and clock. Less real estate, all the same functionality, but without a top AND bottom bar.

    Zsnes. Does not work in any way shape or form, or under wine.

    What Linux gets RIGHT however is it's ability to find and install 99% of my hardware without me hunting for hours for drivers, inclusion of most of the software I prefer (firefox, gimp, pidgin, open office, cd burner), Compiz Fusion (blows every Windows attempt away!), and it's open source nature. There is something good knowing the code to my machine is inspected by lots of eyes, not just one corporation, and it's also good to know that if I was knowledgeable enough, some of those eyes could be mine.

    Honestly Linux feels "closer" than it ever did. It just needs to solve a few naggling issues before it can fully dominate the world by desktop. Another way it could do so is by being AHEAD of the curve. It would be nice if there was a superior FOSS Skype killer, since skype is actually deficient in numerous ways, including not being FOSS. Speex is a better speech compression algorithm, so it would seem like we have the tools in hand to beat the current corporate paradigm too, and yet it sadly isn't happening.

  • my 2 minutes of hate (Score:3, Interesting)

    by British (51765) <british1500@gmail.com> on Sunday July 20, 2008 @02:20PM (#24264301) Homepage Journal

    My old junker 700MHz Linux box fell to the 'linux curse' where hardware started failing left & right, thus making the OS fail. It happens on every 2ndhand system I install Linux on. So I get a refurbished computer & reinstall linux. Spent over an hour getting the resolutioon BACK to 1024x768 on a Micron monitor. Nothing, NOTHING should ever take that long just to change the desktop resolution. Ubuntu's "desktop resolution" is like a showcase of resolutions you honestly dont want(640x480)

    Tbe rest of my time was spent trying to get my account to authenticate in Samba. I have never been so frustrated with one app than Samba. It's just one authentication problem after another.

  • by mark99 (459508) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @03:48PM (#24265077) Journal

    MS has never brought out an OS that had as many haters as Vista. So according to this logic the next version will be great.

    Actually from what I have heard, it might indeed be true.

  • Linux is for bitches (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lank (19922) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @05:19PM (#24265737)

    OK. I've got karma to burn, but seriously, check out this website first before starting to flame or mod me down - at the very least it's got a funny picture on the page :)

    http://www.linuxisforbitches.com/ [linuxisforbitches.com]

    Seems fairly appropriate given the topic at hand...

The world is moving so fast these days that the man who says it can't be done is generally interrupted by someone doing it. -- E. Hubbard

Working...