Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #351631
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS |
| Date | 2016-04-24 09:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3424143.70CB5%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink) |
| References | <D3405DEB.70A8D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <nfinm33o0j@news7.newsguy.com> |
On 4/24/16, 8:10 AM, in article nfinm33o0j@news7.newsguy.com, "Fabian
Russell" <fb@zen.info> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 23:02:03 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>>
>> I have used the example of the Quit / Exit dichotomy. This has been just an
>> example of something that should be trivial to get right that is not gotten
>> right.
>
> What the fuck is "right" and what the fuck is "wrong?"
What helps to make a system be more efficient and easier to use. One that
reduced the chance of errors.
It comes down to this: if productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction is
important to you then you should pay attention to the research that has
backed how to improve those things or at least use a system where the
developers have. Does not mean all teams will come to the exact same
conclusions or make the same tradeoffs, and there is also room for
individual preference. On Desktop Linux you have two teams who have done
this - the KDE and Gnome teams. BOTH agree with the research that shows this
is important not just on a program-by-program level but a system level (it
is, in fact, one of the key reasons KDE was started at all).
But no distro delevers on this. Even those that seek to be "pure" KDE or
"pure" Gnome are stuck in the desktop Linux ecosystem with its mish-mash of
inconsistent and poorly followed standards.
This does effect productivity, efficiency, and error-reduction. So if you
think those are important, as I do, the desktop Linux not only gets this
wrong (no system gets it perfect), it gets it horrendously wrong. Some
distro get it a bit less horrendously than others, and you might be able to
customize a system to make it even a bit better, but you are stuck with the
ecosystem.
> There are no fucking answers.
What would make you think this? Really: given the massive levels of research
on usability why would you think there are "no fucking answers"? That is
just an admission of your ignorance of the research.
> The only REAL solution is to make the system infinitely CONFIGURABLE
> so the user can set any and all options, buttons, menus, etc. according
> to his preferences.
In my OP I noted that Linux could group to be this! It could lead to more
choice and flexibility. Much of this you snipped:
-----
What I would like to see, though, and Shuttleworth and others in
the open source community have made similar comments, is greater
cooperation from the big names in the OSS world, such as KDE and
Gnome. With enough cooperation, they could make it so it was not
hard to make software that would run well on KDE or Gnome (not
just in function, but in consistency with the system). This would
allow systems to reduce their "duct taped" feel... and allow
distros to differentiate themselves even more (and this offer more
and greater choice). Ubuntu could have a simple set of Open and
Save dialogs where PCLOS could have more robust and complex
options. And, of course, the end user could alter things if they
wished. I am under no illusion that this can happen easily or
perfectly (after all, even on a single-GUI system such as OS X
this is far from perfect), but it could be made to be much better.
And I think this will eventually happen with the OSS world - at
least to some extent. As others have noted, to some extent it
already has, and folks such as Shuttleworth are pushing to have it
happen even more.
-----
> GNU/Linux does exactly this. Microshit Windows and Apple do not.
>
> The amount of configuration possible with GNU/Linux is mind boggling,
> and that is how a good design should be.
Perhaps the biggest problem with desktop Linux is its LACK of choice. You
are stuck with a very broken ecosystem and a limited selection of software:
in most desktop categories far more limited than what is on the competition.
And the software written for Linux tends to be written for the lowest common
denominator because developers do not know what the system it is running on
will be like.
> GNU/Linux has it RIGHT. Microshit Windows and Apple have it WRONG.
>
> I have my Linux tuned exactly how I want it. On my Microshit Windows
> machines I am always frustrated with the built-in rigidity.
>
> So, once again, your assertions are meaningless.
Yet very well backed by research and evidence. How do you account for that?
>> This is true for word processing, email, image organizing, etc. In general,
>> open source systems simply do not handle these things as well. And this
>> makes it less likely that people will use such products. The reality is,
>> people are often reluctant to change - and if you are looking to have them
>> change to something that works *less* well, even if it is free, you will
>> have (relatively) few takers. So usability factors matter... they matter a
>> lot.
>
> The offer of a totally free, hand-crafted, precision engineered, European
> sports car will also be rejected because some people are too intransigent
> to master the art of manual gear shifting.
>
> But no automatic transmission will ever beat a manual stick shift.
Your analogy is completely flawed: those cares are, as you note, created
with precision and an overall design philosophy that covers the whole
system... the exact opposite of desktop Linux. And those cars are expensive,
not free like Desktop Linux. To bring in the competition and make a more
reasoned comparison:
Desktop Linux is free.
Macs cost about 2.5x what a Windows system does on average.
Desktop Linux can run on almost any hardware.
OS X is supported on the hardware of one OEM.
Desktop Linux has a cult-like group pushing a "philosophy".
OS X has a lot of people who respect its ease of use.
Desktop Linux has been promoted by Dell, HP, Walmart, and more.
OS X is promoted by one company.
Desktop Linux can be migrated to on "Windows" hardware.
OS X can be migrated to only if you buy a new system [1].
Desktop Linux can be had in many, many forms (distros).
OS X comes in only one "distro".
And yet Desktop Linux is failing to attack any but a tiny sliver of users.
>> But the story is worse than that on the desktop for Linux: there are also
>> many things where the solutions are not just not as good, they essentially
>> do not exist. Examples of this include a good screencasting tool (such as
>> ScreenFlow or Camtasia) to quilting software (such as Electric Quilt) to
>> tools to make it easier to read text on screen (Tofu), etc. Also there are
>> games and many, many industry specific tools for dentists and chiropractors
>> and schools and on and on and on.
>
> This is total nonsense.
So name the software that competes well with the software on the
competition:
* ScreenFlow:
* Elextric Quilt:
* MS Word:
* Photoshop
We could go on and on and on. Desktop Linux is simply lacking in choices
that compete well in many areas. Below you twist that to mean I am
suggesting it competes NOWHERE well and then look at whom to blame for the
places where it does not.
In other words you offer no examples of my being wrong but claim I am.
> Two of the most advanced and sophisticated software packages in the world,
> Mathematica and Matlab, have been very successfully ported to Linux. In
> fact I use these packages exclusively on my Linux machines, and the Linux OS
> doubtless provides a superior framework for such software.
>
> So if Mathematica and Matlab can be ported to Linux, why can't other software
> packages, such as Photoshop, also be ported?
They might be ABLE to be. Sure... though Adobe has gone into detail about
both the market AND technical reasons why they have not ported Photoshop.
But my point is about what *IS*, not what *COULD* be.
> The answer is that these commercial companies do not possess the talent
> and skills to be able to do it. That's the only reason.
>
> So the fault is not GNU/Linux. The fault is these incompetent software
> providers.
You are looking to place blame. I am looking for what works best.
>> What I would like to see, though, and Shuttleworth and others in the open
>> source community have made similar comments, is greater cooperation from the
>> big names in the OSS world, such as KDE and Gnome. With enough cooperation,
>> they could make it so it was not hard to make software that would run well
>> on KDE or Gnome
>
> Of course that's what you'd like to see, because you are a fucking asshole.
>
> In reality, Shuttleworth, KDE, and Gnome are degenerative forces within
> the GNU/Linux ecosystem. Their expanded adoption will only seriously
> degrade Linux.
Ah, yes, you know a lot more about Desktop Linux than Shuttleworth and those
who make KDE and Gnome. LOL!
> For a fucking asshole like you it could be a good thing, but GNU/Linux
> is not and was not created to service the needs of fucking assholes.
All you have is insults and name calling. OK.
--
* OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-22 23:02 -0700
WPF? 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-23 07:58 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 12:33 +0200
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:07 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-23 13:05 +0000
Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 07:50 -0700
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-23 10:52 -0400
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 16:53 +0200
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:08 -0700
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 08:14 -0700
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 08:10 -0700
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-25 07:57 -0500
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:14 -0700
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-25 10:53 -0700
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-25 22:28 +0200
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-26 07:31 -0500
Re: Who needs a roomful of monkeys banging on a keyboard, when you have Snit? Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 07:09 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 15:10 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 09:24 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 20:37 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 14:00 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 23:01 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-24 23:10 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2016-04-24 23:34 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-25 00:50 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 01:54 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-25 04:17 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 21:33 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 09:01 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:18 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 22:29 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 16:28 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 21:27 -0400
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 18:34 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-26 09:20 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 07:05 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 11:54 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 13:24 -0400
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-26 22:30 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-26 22:45 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 20:53 -0400
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 18:06 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-27 03:21 +0200
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-27 10:44 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 12:49 +0200
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-27 22:14 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-28 00:27 +0200
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 11:52 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 18:00 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 01:41 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 19:18 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 10:32 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:49 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 10:26 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 09:07 -0400
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-25 22:31 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 21:41 -0400
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 11:54 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 00:39 +0200
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-26 18:15 -0700
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 02:42 +0000
Re: A short take on my view of Linux / OSS Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:21 -0700
csiph-web