Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×
Bug Graphics Open Source Operating Systems Linux

List of Major Linux Desktop Problems Updated For 2016 (narod.ru) 349

An anonymous reader writes: Phoronix reports that Artem S. Tashkinov's Major Linux Problems on the Desktop has been updated for 2016. It is a comprehensive list of various papercut issues and other inconveniences of Linux on the PC desktop. Among the issues cited for Linux not being ready for the desktop include graphics driver issues, audio problems, hardware compatibility problems, X11 troubles, a few issues with Wayland, and font problems. At the project management side, there is also cited a lack of cooperation among open source developers and fragmentation of desktops. Let's discuss.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

List of Major Linux Desktop Problems Updated For 2016

Comments Filter:
  • Don't worry (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @02:18PM (#51209953)

    SystemD will fix all of this.

    • Re:Don't worry (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @03:38PM (#51210549)

      Sadly enough my system isn't compatible with systemd its init implementation, a seperate (encrypted) /usr partition is unsupported. Using the old trusted sysv-init works just fine, but according to systemd advocates it isn't systemd its fault (haven't we heard that before):
      http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/

  • by FuegoFuerte ( 247200 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @02:26PM (#51210003)

    ...back in 2001, the year of Linux on the Desktop. Seriously, getting a desktop "right" is hard... Apple certainly hasn't figured it out yet, none of the Linux camps have figured it out... it's hard. The only one that may have come close to perfecting it was Microsoft with Windows 7, and then they went and screwed it all up after they had it.

    • Actually, no... Microsoft didn't come close to 'perfecting' anything. Now if you had instead mentioned the OEMs, specifically who sold systems with Windows pre-loaded with drivers that the OEM provided? Different story entirely.

      Therein lies the hand-tied-behind=back problem Linux faces. You see, distros don't have major OEMs going out of their way to make solid consumer computers with working drivers that are 1) supported, and b) tuned to the product for stability and performance. Now I'm not saying that th

    • The only one that may have come close to perfecting it was Microsoft with Windows 7

      I see you started trolling early this year.

    • I started using Linux on my desktop full time back in 2002. I've currently got the latest Linux Mint installed, and it's a dream to use. When I started using a Mac for work in 2012, I found the OS rather frustrating to use, and have done much tinkering to make it more like Linux again.

      As far as I'm concerned, either Linux has been ready for the desktop for a very long time already, or being ready for the desktop is some unattainable status that so far no OSes have managed.

    • Apple pretty much figured it out, until they made Mountain Lion resemble iOS. Why does a non touch interface HAVE TO be similar to the touch version? Windows 7 was perfect, and every Windows user I've met seems to like that the most. I've made Windows 10 sometimes resemble Windows 7 using Classic Shell: it works better on 10 than on 8.

      On the unix side of things, KDE was great, but from 4.x onwards, added so many things that it's too resource heavy: it really takes a while to boot in w/ KDE 4+. Same is

  • by nimbius ( 983462 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @02:32PM (#51210035) Homepage
    editorial authority: guise linux its...its just not ready for the desktop. its got graphics driver issues...
    community: the ones preventing nearly 200 steam games from running on it?
    editorial authority nonono guys its worse than that see theres audio problems too, the audio has problems
    community: you mean with the countless instructibles articles on home theater via the pi?
    editorial authority: guys i wish it were that simple but you see X has the issues too, its wayland isnt ready.
    community: you...you know those two things are completely different right? xorgs been stable for a decade....
    editorial authority: the font is ugly.
    community:...pick...another one?
    editorial authority: its fragmented...the desktops....theyre all fragmented.
    community:....what?
    editorial authority: and i heard linux torval yelling at people too.
    • by khasim ( 1285 )

      That's the problem. If you want a list of the "top 10 Linux problems" you will ALWAYS find 10 Linux problems that are the worst.

      And the same can be said of the "top 10 Windows problems" and the "top 10 Mac problems" and so forth. And any other "top 10 problems".

      Making a list of "problems" is EASY.

      Making a list of specific problems that are preventing people from using Linux in specific roles ... that's difficult. Because most of the "problems" are NOT technological. They boil down to "Linux does not look/be

      • And if you take that approach then you'll see "top 10 things where Linux is not enough like Windows/Mac". And you will be right back where you started.

        While the sentiment is right we can really only hope that one day Linux may actually get to the point where those are the only complaints. A lot of what is in the article is very legitimate deal breakers (hardware issues, major package management headaches, system breaking faults that require scouring through the internet bashing commands into the command line to fix).

        If we can get to the point where all the complains are "it's not windows" then I would consider Linux ready for the desktop.

    • by tepples ( 727027 )

      editorial authority: guise linux its...its just not ready for the desktop. its got graphics driver issues...
      community: the ones preventing nearly 200 steam games from running on it?

      Editor: Yes. Here's a list of PCs sold in stores today that won't run said 200 Steam games in Linux. Fix Steam on these PCs.

      • http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bn... [bhphotovideo.com]

        Yep, here is one, a search for Android in any cell phone store will give you 100s more.

        • by tepples ( 727027 )

          Steam is for GNU/Linux, not for Android. By "Linux" in the context of a post that also mentioned Steam, I was more likely referring to the kind of Linux-based system that runs Steam (namely GNU/Linux) than to the kind of Linux-based system that does not run Steam (namely Android). So let me rephrase my claim more rigorously:

          There are a lot of x86-64 PCs sold in stores that do not run GNU/Linux well and therefore do not run Steam for Linux well.

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      So.... what are the reasons for 98.5% [statcounter.com] of the population not using Linux on the desktop? It's certainly not the price. Is it really all just catch-22, no users so no apps, no apps so no users?

    • I have never had any of the problems listed here. Not on old desktop computers, not on brand new desktops. In nearly twenty years I have had no trouble getting it all to just work. Also, I like ugly fonts.
      • The fonts are a big issue for me personally. I have particularly picky eyes when it comes to font rendering I guess. I usually will spend days to weeks trying to get linux font rendering to my liking, but it just never quite gets there. Everything looks blurry and makes my eyes water if I try to read for more than a few minutes at a time. Which is a real shame, since the rendering looks very good on hi dpi devices. But in 94dpi? No thank you.
        • by bmo ( 77928 )

          >Everything looks blurry and makes my eyes water

          I think that can be said for Windows font rendering.

          What, exactly, is wrong with this: https://i.imgur.com/L5qoElU.pn... [imgur.com]

          That's what I see at 94dpi.

          I think that's a lot clearer than "clear type" and a lot less fuzzy than Apple fonts on a standard monitor (I can't say anything about Retina displays as I don't own one, but higher /should/ be less fuzzy)

          And that's with KDE. KDE used to be notorious for bad font rendering and ridiculously bad kerning. Now I pr

      • TFA mentions audio on Linux. If you've not had a problem then you haven't been using Linux enough. It's part of the install process:
        Step 20: Install GRUB.
        Step 21: Fuck with the user's Audio so he tears his hair out.
        Step 22: Reboot system.
        Step 23: Show welcome message and if the bootup sound played correctly just update pulseaudio to fuck with him again. :-)

    • editorial authority: guise linux its...its just not ready for the desktop. its got graphics driver issues...
      community: the ones preventing nearly 200 steam games from running on it?

      Yes, those. The open source drivers perform badly, and don't have fixes/workarounds for broken games. The proprietary drivers do, but often break against kernel and userland software versions. Neither is particularly pleasant with weird display setups (niche resolutions or refresh rates.)

      That's ignoring that driver support often lags, there's tons of hardware out there that's either not supported yet, not supported well, or never will be supported.

      editorial authority nonono guys its worse than that see theres audio problems too, the audio has problems
      community: you mean with the countless instructibles articles on home theater via the pi?

      If you need to resort to "instructibles" [sic], you've alrea

  • by aix tom ( 902140 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @02:35PM (#51210049)

    ... to other OSes.

    For example:

    It should be possible to configure pretty much everything via GUI (in the end Windows and Mac OS allow this) which is still not a case for some situations and operations.

    If "Configurable via GUI" in Windows means you "add some arcane registry key via the registry editor", then *maybe*.

    • by tepples ( 727027 )

      If "Configurable via GUI" in Windows means you "add some arcane registry key via the registry editor", then *maybe*.

      From a Windows fan's point of view, one key difference between the Windows Registry on the one hand and text configuration files (/etc and dotfiles) on the other hand is that the Registry is a database. This means it's more likely to be resilient to data entry errors. With text files, a syntax error usually invalidates the entire file, and there's nothing preventing the user from typing in a string where an integer is expected. Sure, the Registry's implementation is technically dubious [wordpress.com], but switching to a m

      • You do realize that a single character wrong in the data field will cause you issues in Windows too right?

        You can also put a string into an integer field in regedit, as you tell it what type the key is, not the other way around.

      • the Registry is a database. This means it's more likely to be resilient to data entry errors.

        ...no it doesn't. ID10T errors are no different no matter where the keystrokes go. It also doesn't prevent the registry itself from corrupting [google.com], which Windows is rather legendary at doing.

        With text files, a syntax error usually invalidates the entire file...

        ...assuming you mean 'a bad configuration entry breaks the application', yes. It means you only have the application/service that relies on it going south. Just like borking a registry entry will bork the application/service that relies on the now-broken registry entry. Not seeing much difference there, unless you're referr

        • Finally, a config file can do something that a registry entry cannot: properly carry its own documentation within the file itself.

          Including a comment stating when you made a change, and the original line transformed into a comment so that it's easy to undo. If there's a way to do that kind of thing with the Windows Registry, I've never heard of it.
        • by tepples ( 727027 )

          ...assuming you mean 'a bad configuration entry breaks the application', yes. It means you only have the application/service that relies on it going south. Just like borking a registry entry will bork the application/service that relies on the now-broken registry entry. Not seeing much difference there, unless you're referring to the registry's backup copy (which amazingly enough, you yourself can do before you edit a config file in *nix.)

          At least in a database, you can change one entry in-place without rewriting everything. In a text file, if you rewrite a single line to be shorter or longer, you have to rewrite the whole rest of the file. And it's easier for an error early in the file to affect the interpretation of lines later in the file because even though '\n' is often a synchronization point, it isn't always.

    • It should be possible to configure pretty much everything via GUI (in the end Windows and Mac OS allow this)

      I'm not a Mac user, so maybe I'm mistaken on this, but isn't OS X (and Apple in general) rather infamous for not letting users configure things very much?

      • The problem is when Windows users try to configure something as they know how to in Windows, this fails. I would say that on the surface, some things appear not to be as customizable. If the GUI does not offer an option, there is a command that does it. Under the hood, people still forget that OS X is Unix and commands still work.

        Speaking of Windows, I have Windows 8. After years of having the ability to tweak a lot of things in previous version, MS decided to bury almost everything from the user. It se

      • I'm not a Mac user, so maybe I'm mistaken on this, but isn't OS X (and Apple in general) rather infamous for not letting users configure things very much?

        A typical user, yeah - the options are plentiful, but not all-encompassing.

        However, if you have admin rights on the box, changing any aspect of OSX' behavior is just a text editor and the right .plist file away.

        • I'm not a Mac user, so maybe I'm mistaken on this, but isn't OS X (and Apple in general) rather infamous for not letting users configure things very much?

          A typical user, yeah - the options are plentiful, but not all-encompassing.

          However, if you have admin rights on the box, changing any aspect of OSX' behavior is just a text editor and the right .plist file away.

          Also with the right commands or hackware a bunch of normally invisible files and folders become visible and ready for your miscreance.

    • by Octorian ( 14086 )

      If "Configurable via GUI" in Windows means you "add some arcane registry key via the registry editor", then *maybe*.

      Yes, that case actually counts.
      In Windows, you actually can do all sorts of user-unfriendly configuration-tweaking without having to open a command prompt or hand-edit a text file.
      This is a big part of why Windows is far more accessible to a certain level of "power user" who isn't quite comfortable with hacking their way across configuration files, but can manage the rest of it.

      I keep saying the Linux community focuses far too much on two extreme user stereotypes:
      A notional "grandparent" who is afraid of an

    • If "Configurable via GUI" in Windows means you "add some arcane registry key via the registry editor", then *maybe*.

      I'm pretty sure no one I know outside of the serious tech heads know what the registry is let alone have added a key to it. Compare that to pretty much no one I know has ever managed to get a working Linux system fully up and running and setup the way they like it WITHOUT resorting to the command line or Google at some point.

      Comparing the two is silly.

      That said I don't mind the CLI and it at least keeps the support calls for Linux away as there's a minimum proficiency that it seems to require which includes

  • Common Dialogs (Score:5, Interesting)

    by darkain ( 749283 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @02:47PM (#51210117) Homepage

    My absolute #1 complaint about Linux on the desktop has always been the lack of Common Dialogs. This is a standard DLL that ships with all versions of Windows dating back to at least 3.1. This DLL handles basic dialogs like File Open, File Save, and Printing. Having this DLL available and with a very simple interface solves multiple problems at once.

    First, it is extremely easy for developers to use the API.

    Secondly, due to the ease of use, developers can focus on their core application instead of writing their own UI for browsing the file system just to open a file or their own printing dialog to enumerate and list printers.

    Third, this ensures a clean and consistent UI across all applications that use the Common Dialogs making the OS and applications as a whole easier to use for the end users.

    Lastly, the Common Dialogs DLL is upgraded with every version of Windows. Take an application written in 1995 and run it on Windows 10. It still works. It uses the Windows 10 UI for opening/saving files, instead of the old clunky Common Dialog UI for 1995.

    This upgrading of the DLL has been another huge advantage too. It has seen several major iterations. The ability to resize the window. The ability to have multiple navigation methods. The ability to drag-n-drop. The ability to copy-paste. Can't remember where you saved that last document? Just open the save dialog again and it'll default to that folder, and you can just copy-paste that folder path into other applications as needed.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by tepples ( 727027 )

      My absolute #1 complaint about Linux on the desktop has always been the lack of Common Dialogs. [A library included with Windows] handles basic dialogs like File Open, File Save, and Printing.

      Every major GUI toolkit on Linux has a file chooser. Tk has one. GTK+ has one. Qt has one. Winelib has one.

      This upgrading of the DLL has been another huge advantage too. It has seen several major iterations. The ability to resize the window. The ability to have multiple navigation methods. The ability to drag-n-drop. The ability to copy-paste. Can't remember where you saved that last document? Just open the save dialog again and it'll default to that folder, and you can just copy-paste that folder path into other applications as needed.

      Since when does the GTK+ file chooser lack these features?

      • Re:Common Dialogs (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Nemyst ( 1383049 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @03:06PM (#51210241) Homepage

        Every major GUI toolkit on Linux has a file chooser. Tk has one. GTK+ has one. Qt has one. Winelib has one.

        Yeah, so that's already three different file choosers, and there's more because a lot of Linux software has NIH syndrome. You're reinforcing the GP's point here.

        • by ndogg ( 158021 )

          You'll never get that from Linux, but you will get this from a particular distribution of Linux, like, say, Ubuntu.

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      As for your first two points unless you're trying very, very hard to avoid dependencies you simply call the standard dialog of your toolkit. They could forward it to a system-wide dialog, but it's unlikely there will be one. The reason for this is that even the simplest dialog requires a massive infrastructure locked in place. Is it an X window or Wayland window? What do the standard objects like lists, buttons, dropdowns etc. look like? How does it do layout? Fonts & anti-aliasing? Key bindings? Before

  • Laptop screen brightness adjustment goes multiple steps with one keypress in Ubuntu and Mint. I still can't believe how such a basic feature is broken, release after release. Yes, I know that there are hacks to fix it, but I should not need to manually fix something silly like that.
    • Re:My pet peeve (Score:4, Informative)

      by greenfruitsalad ( 2008354 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @03:15PM (#51210325)

      install a retail copy of windows instead of manufacturer supplied OEM one and your hardware will work even less. that's what you're seeing with linux.

      on the one hand you have a heavily manufacturer customised version of windows (on which the manufacturer spent months), on the other you have a generic distribution of gnu/linux about which the laptop manufacturer doesn't give a sh*t. blame the manufacturer not the linux distro. but it's a chicken/egg problem. why would they consider a minor OS that doesn't require hardware upgrade every year or two?

      buy a dell xps laptop with preinstalled ubuntu and you'll get the same hardware support experience you get from a windows laptop. a laptop built FOR a particular OS.

      • But the brightness problem concerns almost all laptops.
        • not in my experience. i have had that problem with one laptop in the past but it was a shit brand like acer/asus/msi (not sure which one). never had this problem on a proper laptop.

  • Many of reasons that exist for Linux are largely a catch-22 (eg, not many people use Linux because most developers don't target that platform, and developers don't tend to target Linux beacuse there aren't enough users to justify the effort).

    Certainly also Linux is not ready for the desktop of anyone who simply wants to copy what everybody else is doing (playing the latest AAA title that is only available for Windows, for example).

    From a commercial standpoint, I could even see that it isn't ready for t

  • by Cro Magnon ( 467622 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @03:06PM (#51210239) Homepage Journal

    My complaint with my Ubuntu desktop is that it doesn't go into sleep mode. My complaint about my Windows laptop is it doesn't come OUT of sleep mode.

  • by techno-vampire ( 666512 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @03:20PM (#51210367) Homepage
    The article makes a big deal about the fact that getting nVidia and AMD cards to work under Linux isn't easy, and he's right. However, he's blaming the wrong person. Neither company is willing to provide either proper OSS drivers or the technical specifications needed for somebody else to write them. All they give us are binary blobs. And, in the case of nVidia, the install process is insane. First you have to boot into a CLI only environment to install them and second you have to do it again every single time there's a kernel update. Fedora, at least, has developed a way around this by using an akmod that checks at boot if there's a proper driver (kmod-nvidia) for the running kernel, and if there isn't, it builds one. Ubuntu still uses the insane version, but at least it automates it so that when there's a kernel update, it prompts you at boot to install the new drivers, doing all of the messy stuff on it's own after getting permission.
    • in the case of nVidia, the install process is insane. First you have to boot into a CLI only environment to install them and second you have to do it again every single time there's a kernel update. Fedora, at least, has developed a way around this by using an akmod that checks at boot if there's a proper driver (kmod-nvidia) for the running kernel, and if there isn't, it builds one. Ubuntu still uses the insane version, but at least it automates it so that when there's a kernel update, it prompts you at boot to install the new drivers, doing all of the messy stuff on it's own after getting permission.

      What? I use Gentoo and I build my own kernels. I simply "emerge nvidia-drivers" after building a new kernel, so the driver is ready for the next boot with that kernel. No need to go "CLI only" for that.

      (However, when nvidia-drivers itself is updated, the currently running X session may lose some acceleration features. I guess that's why some distros play it safe and only update it outside X. But this doesn't happen when simply rebuilding the same driver for a new kernel, as the libraries don't change.)

      • Thank you. I only wrote about Fedora and Ubuntu because they're the only two I've worked with on computers with nVidia graphics. If Gentoo has a better way of packaging the drivers, that's good. However, if you go to the nVidia website, you'll see that I described the official way to install the drivers, as recommended by the OEM.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This is simply not true. AMD directly contributes to the Open Source drivers and no longer even develops closed source drivers for Linux. The only reason they don't fully release the sources for legacy binary linux drivers is due to contractual/license/patent issues however to say neither company is unwilling to provide specs or drivers is either a falsehood due to misinformation or a complete lie.

      Google it, AMD/ATI is fully in.

  • by rubycodez ( 864176 ) on Wednesday December 30, 2015 @03:45PM (#51210625)

    I pick my hardware to run my LInux apps properly, including printer/scanner. All that whining the author does about specific hardware types. If you really are hard core gamer pick the right OS for your games, Linux may not be it.

    Sound issues: yes there are some for specific use cases, valid point

    Printer/scanner blah blah - pick the right hardware for your OS and quit whining.

    X11 issues - yes X is dated, insecure, single threaded for important things,

    Wayland - not done yet so who cares

    Kernel - yes it can crash on driver failure, so can Windows or Mac OSX. Done it on all three myself, do I get a prize?

    Distribution non-standards for settings, etc. - no this is a strength, and there are only a handful of really popular distros anyway. I want the choice

    Wine whining - use a VM you putz and run windows for windows apps

    No equivalent for hardcore CADD/Photo - use a VM you putz and run windows for windows apps

    grub update problems - no honestly haven't run into them

    no security update lists - wrong, you can cron a query to the package manager and email it. even list required, security, etc.

    major recent security problems - shell shock, openssl - actually openssl a problem where private interests led to rubber-stamping crap. shellshock - yes bash is a very complicated bloated shell, smarter people (like *BSD) run services under much simpler shell.

    look at all the security vulns found in package x, more eyes doesn't mean less vulns - no the eyes are one means for finding them. another might be fuzzers. hey at least your 134 gtk+thingy were fixed

    windows more secure because updates mandatory - wrong, some of those auto updates break things and so serious places have to vet each one and withhold...dang same as linux or any other OS! sysadmin is hard and painful to do correctly!

    systemd woes with freezing, crashes, undefined state - yes, it's badly designed bloated trash. don't use it for serious servers. Poettering is a disease.

    samba is hard - yes sysadmin is hard

    GNOME and KDE woes and no enough manpower - some of us use better desktops

    steep learning curve, have to use CLI sometimes - yeah just like windows registry editing and powershell

    no antiviruses or similar - yes there are, and they're free and even will spot other things like .jars with vulnerable java in them. clamav bitch

    forward and backward compatible kernel problems - yes, kernel version change means specific drivers. again pick your hardware for linux, use standard things, you want bleeding edge hardware maybe you should change OS, Linux isn't for you. reality bites

    GNOME/KDE change things move things - yes, the major desktops suck, use one that listens to user needs and isn't trying to be star trek command and control

    oh noes linux devs don't care because they broke Loki installer - more game related whines. seriously kid, if you want a game machine buy windows unless you're into minecraft or steam linux or similar

    character limits in linux - yup 255 for filename and 4096 for path. be nice if it was longer

    case sensitivity in file names, no rational basis - wrong, very rational basis for POSIX system to require that. that will never be changed

    file creation times - indeed many issues with the other timestamps in linux depending on filesystem type, that should be fixed

    Linux security a mess because this or that vuln just found - no, they were fixed so quit your whining, and any other general purpose OS on planet earth has similar, windows included

    whining about binary api/abi between distros and binaries for specific distros needed - yes, each distro is a different OS. get that into your head. there is no problem.

    No CIFS/AD level replacement/equivalent because samba doesn't count? yes samba 4 plus nis++ does count. oh you have to think and administer things differently than a microsoft cert wank? yes, yes you do. Remember kiddies, if you're a microso

    • (last line is just just troll reward for anyone that read the whole thing)

    • I agree with a lot of what you said but some of it stands out:

      I pick my hardware to run my LInux apps properly, including printer/scanner. All that whining the author does about specific hardware types. If you really are hard core gamer pick the right OS for your games, Linux may not be it.

      The author addresses this as being a main problem in the migrant case. You want people to TRY Linux as a new desktop? They won't research and buy a PC for that. But that's irrelevant really because ultimately it doesn't matter what hardware you chose, in many cases (e.g. GPU) you're a second class citizen and regardless of your choice or research you won't ever have the speed or feature set available in other OSes of the same hardware.

      windows more secure because updates mandatory - wrong, some of those auto updates break things and so serious places have to vet each one and withhold...dang same as linux or any other OS! sysadmin is hard and painful to do correctly!

      In the desk

  • This is a very high quality list and I fully recommend it for anyone that is currently working on FLOSS software or is looking to get involved in a high-impact project.

  • I think a few people are ok with it as long as they use that UI shell thing called... uhm.. Android? Yeah, that's the name, Android. Seems to work fine for a Billion users.
  • I started at a new company which included a stock Ubuntu (I came from Fedora previously). I hate their stock UI so I switched to Xubuntu.

    1. Lots of configuration necessary since -my- XFCE looks more akin to Gnome 2 (My axe to grind but I'd love to have XFCE pre-canned layouts with the ability to save customized layouts afterwards through a GUI)
    2. The graphical package manager worked maybe 60% of the time, so I immediately abandoned it and went to apt-get
    3. I regularly get 'this and that' crashed errors even

  • In 2003/2004 I used Linux desktop at my job. I used Redhat 8 and 9 with KDE. It was usable. Ten years later, default KDE on Ubuntu 14.04 is barely usable - too many annoying things. Plasma 5.3 looked promising, but "not there yet". Unity is at least stable, but completely unconfigurable and I *hate* window buttons being on right. Also, selecting a window from the panel is completely annoying as you have to click on the panel, and then to move mouse to select screen - complete waste of time. I now use Cinnam

  • I use Linux on the desktop and 90% of this stuff does not affect me. But.. what really gets on my nerves... remote desktop support.

    Sure there is VNC but VNC has no sound! I guess Pulse can do it... That's what I keep reading but I can't make it work no matter how hard I try. Even if Pulse actually can provide remote sound.. (which I am begining to thing requires a visit from the friendly ghost of Leonert Poettering himself) it should be seamless with the remote desktop app to be considered good enough for

    • by armanox ( 826486 )

      VNC isn't the product you want. You might want to consider looking at NX (there is the proprietary implementation from NoMachine, and the protocol is open source so there are projects like FreenNX)

  • Some of the things listed are valid, some not (like updates breaking the boot process - i experienced that once in the last 15 years of continuous linux use. OTOH I use debian (based) distributions for stability.

The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely 1 bananosecond.

Working...