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.
Don't worry (Score:5, Funny)
SystemD will fix all of this.
Re:Don't worry (Score:5, Informative)
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/
Re:Don't worry (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea how many desktop users really care about SystemD or not.
I tried it with and without it... No difference in my opinion, I was using Linux for a desktop, just as long as the distribution is correctly setup I was fine.
Re: (Score:3)
These were already solved... (Score:4, Insightful)
...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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
The only one that may have come close to perfecting it was Microsoft with Windows 7
I see you started trolling early this year.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re:Windows 7 Perfect? Spare me (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're the kind of person who mainly uses windows, and thus doesn't notice the weaknesses, then you will really like Windows 7. If you are aware of the full potential of the desktop, then you will see plenty of holes in it.
Re: (Score:2)
On this PC-BSD laptop, I sometimes use multiple workspaces, and it has been useful at times. Yet, I don't miss it in Windows 7, and I don't use it at all in Windows 10. I can see how it would be useful if I had multiple displays.
I can see Workspaces becoming a resource hog if one has different wallpapers for different virtual desktops. Lumina however doesn't allow that.
Re: (Score:2)
The lack of virtual desktops is a huge, glaring blot.
Just update to Windows 10 then. You get all the benefits of virtual desktops ... yeah you get virtual desktops. Hurrah!
Re: (Score:2)
Naw, no trolling... not much anyway. When I say "close to perfect," I mean something closer to "the best desktop OS UI that's been created yet, by anyone, where most things 'just work.'" And I say that writing this from a Mac that I've been using as my primary daily laptop for two years - and I STILL hate the UI. The multi-monitor/projector support is TERRIBLE, Finder has one of the worst file explorer layouts I've seen, it's about a 10-step process to switch from normal headphones to USB or back, my tas
Re: (Score:2)
Finder is replaceable, mac ships with a system scripting language and has for decades, the setting for icons on the taskbar is a set by you to shrink mine and most everyone else's expand when you mouse over....
You really shouldn't be doing reviews.
Re: (Score:2)
My eject key is to the right of F12 and above delete.
Re: (Score:2)
Every Windows user I've met likes 7 and prefers staying w/ it over 8 or even 10. Only thing - I got a laptop w/ 8.1 preloaded, didn't wanted to fork out extra for 7 Pro, and so moved to 10 at the earliest opportunity. Had I been on 7, I'd have stayed there, but the fact that Microsoft is undermining support for 7 and will end it in 2020 makes it time to look at alternatives. I have 10 as well as PC-BSD.
When you say 'rest of us', it's highly presumptive to imply that the 'rest of us' are Linux users. L
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Hmpf. Probably 90% of the problems also apply ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... 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*.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
...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.
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
You'll never get that from Linux, but you will get this from a particular distribution of Linux, like, say, Ubuntu.
Re: (Score:3)
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
Re: (Score:2)
But it does use common libraries, which is what a DLL is.
My pet peeve (Score:2)
Re:My pet peeve (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Nothing surprising.... (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
So that would fit into the category I mentioned in the third paragraph.
There is very little from a commercial productivity standpoint that you can do with Windows that you cannot also do with Linux using different software other than simply being what somebody is used to.
But not everyone wants to be bothered learning something new, so Linux is simply too inconvenient for many people.
While this is a perfectly valid reason to not use Linux, it is worth noting that this is more of a case of the user not
Re: (Score:2)
So that would fit into the category I mentioned in the third paragraph.
There is very little from a commercial productivity standpoint that you can do with Windows that you cannot also do with Linux using different software other than simply being what somebody is used to.
But not everyone wants to be bothered learning something new, so Linux is simply too inconvenient for many people.
While this is a perfectly valid reason to not use Linux, it is worth noting that this is more of a case of the user not being ready to use Linux than Linux not being ready for the end-user.
That's kind of like saying that expecting every car driver to be a garage mechanic is a reasonable proposition.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's more like comparing a car with a column shifter vs a floor shifter. It's different, but works nonetheless.
6 of one half dozen of the other (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Video Issues (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
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.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
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.
many non-issues, some serious ones (Score:5, Interesting)
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 microsoft click and point wank, you're not really a computer person.
Well, fuck compatibility, there are now three versions of OpenSSL in the wild? There are more SSL libraries than that, but if you care then there really is only one that is truly non-rubber stamped and is working very hard to be really secure.
Linux has 255 character limit for filenames. no, linux is a kernel you dumb fuck
Re: (Score:3)
(last line is just just troll reward for anyone that read the whole thing)
Re: (Score:3)
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
Zan (Score:2)
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.
Seems to be doing ok (Score:2)
Some notes on a new Linux Desktop (Score:2)
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
For me, its going backwards (Score:2)
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
Missing a big one... Remote Desktop (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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)
Yes and no (Score:2)
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.
Re:Even if we solved all of them... (Score:5, Interesting)
Even if we solve all of those the Linux Desktop still wouldn't have a meaningfull market share.
And as one of the users, why should it? It already does what users want. Why would doing what non-users want make it better? As open source, how would it benefit existing users to have additional non-technical users? It wouldn't even predict better forum questions or answers.
The Year of the Linux Desktop happened in the 90s. It was, we were, many of us still are.
Interoperability needs user base (Score:4, Insightful)
And as one of the users, why should it? It already does what users want. Why would doing what non-users want make it better?
There are non-users who became or remained non-users because Linux didn't do what they wanted, specifically interoperate with a particular application or piece of hardware.
As open source, how would it benefit existing users to have additional non-technical users?
A larger user base means developers and publishers of applications and hardware are more likely to consider making their products compatible in order to reach that user base.
Re:Even if we solved all of them... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's the chicken and the egg thing. The more users the more support from hardware makers. If linux was even 5 percent of the market it would make a big difference in the level of support. We're too few to matter.
Re: (Score:3)
As open source, how would it benefit existing users to have additional non-technical users?
This quote is the reason Linux has few games, the reason why you have piss poor slow graphics drivers, the reason why vendors aren't interested in supporting Linux drivers, and the reason why many developers consider it a second class system.
With critical mass comes interest from other parties that can help have a real positive affect on your experience. Your Linux text console server runs as great as it did in the 90s? Good stuff, more power to you. But in the mean time desktop users are being royally scre
Re: (Score:2)
I am but one person and I know this. The presence of games, or lack thereof, is of no importance to me when selecting an operating system. Linux is not, nor will it ever be, the best choice for everyone. I don't really think that's actually the goal any more.
I don't think anyone really cares if there's Linux on every desktop. I know I don't. If you can't play the games you want to play with Linux then you have other choices in either games or operating systems.
Not every car is made for me. Not every flavor
Re: (Score:3)
I can't help but imagine how things could be if we just got real cooperation from hardware manufacturers. So much bullshit to wade through just to make their shit work. I just installed SolydK on an old Dell E6500 with an NVidia graphics accelerator. I installed scorched3d from the repository and played it with the open source Nvidia driver then installed the proprietary one. It was like night and day. Barely playable without the proprietary ones. Why? How does crippled hardware benefit Nvidia?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The hardware isn't crippled. The hardware works fine with the drivers they offer, it is this huge desire to compile from source that is the problem. What is wrong with their proprietary drivers in your mind?
Re: (Score:2)
Only work with X, and specific versions at that.
No KMS support.
Broken/crashy video acceleration.
Older graphics cards are blacklisted. Using older drivers means using older X and related software.
Inability to debug crashes. (this is why ability to compile is important).
feature support, eg optimus, sli.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So I'm not the only one randomly being logged out on Slashdot? FYI, Chrome on Windows 7.
Re: (Score:2)
It's happened to me a few times in the last two days, MacPro, MacProLap, Mavericks and Yosemite.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Look before you click! If you see .ru and you're interested in English language content, you're usually in the wrong place. ;)
Re: Pop u alert (Score:2)
Amazon spyware is off by default (Score:2)
Canonical has deals with Amazon
Ubuntu Unity is no longer defaulting to Amazon integration [networkworld.com]. Furthermore, Xubuntu avoids all this and is only a sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop away.
Re:Issues? How about major security holes? (Score:5, Informative)
For one thing, that's a hole GRUB, not Linux. For another, it requires already having physical access to a machine during its boot process. And if you have physical access to a booting machine, its owner may already be f#cked.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, with physical access you could just pull the drives and hook them to another computer, why is a Grub exploit really an issue anyways?
Re: (Score:3)
Well unless your computer is inside a secure cabinet preventing access to its internal components and any firewire ports, you DO need to have an armed guard at your computer 24/7 if you don't trust everyone who could have physical access to it. A bootloader password is of no use on a physically unsecured computer.
A person standing in front of a computer without proper credentials could also access the boot selection menu (immediately before the bootloader menu), boot from a USB drive/CD/floppy/network devic
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And if you have physical access to a booting machine, its owner may already be f#cked.
Using that logic, nobody should ever be required to type a password when physically present at the console.
Using that logic then we should never implement security features that deter passersby but will not stop a determined attacker.
Re: (Score:2)
AC's post said "Linux". Had it said "Desktop Linux", "GNU/Linux", or "X11/Linux", I would have read it as the whole thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing that only applies to very specific versions of a particular bootloader, that you may or may not be running (I'm not using GRUB 2 anyway...).
Re: (Score:3)
Between this, and Microsoft's ongoing "UWP" debacle, is there any OS out there now that doesn't suck ass?
There never has been. One sysadmin maxim is that all OSes suck, and your job is to pick wisely and reduce suckiness.
Incidentally, I've spent some of the spare time during the holidays to convert some of my servers from Enterprise Linux 6 to Gentoo. The suckiness factor for EL7 is simply too high.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, guess what? Learn how a computer works, then we'll talk. Seriously. Don't they teach you guys anything in school anymore?
Re: (Score:3)
I know it's a troll, and a pretty dated one at that, but...
If you're a VB developer, you have no business being a sysadmin.