Feren OS game changer

[MrCrispy]

The learning process is there. It may be extremely shallow, but it happened. You even point out the download page having screenshots. The very first time you had to install some extra application (maybe even one of the easy mode stores) you had some sort of instruction. There's nothing intuitive about downloading an exe, being prompted to configure it, etc... Once you learn it, they're all degrees of easy. However, if all you know is one method, then it becomes the way you expect it to be so anything else is hard or confusing.
If you want to experience the learning process, go help an elderly person with Windows 10.. I'd bet they'd happen into the Store firstly before finding some installer on a website.

and I'm really not trying to be combative in this reply. I honestly think we feel Windows is easier because it's the process we've been exposed to for the past 25 years, and not because there's anything intuitive about it.

If you want to call clicking the 'download' button on website, then Run, Next a learning process that's fine. Even knowing how to open a program (double click an icon) is something to learn. As is typing.

But you honestly can't compare that with -

- knowing what the GUI for the package manager in your distro of choice is called, if it has a GUI app for that. And those apps are super geeky. e.g. in Mint right now I open it and the first thing I see is 'switch to local mirror?'. Do you have any idea how incomprehensible and scary that is to a casual user? Then find the category for the app, navigate through the hundreds of options and pick one.
- or opening bash, type sudo apt/yum/rpm <package name which you found somewhere>

And how about uninstall? The usual instructions go something like 'go to ~/., rm -rf .prog, rm -rf /usr/local/bin/prog' etc. Again, scary stuff. vs a sane Uninstall program option.

You do have a point that people are used to Windows. But the way it does things isn't wrong, it was designed for casual users, not tech geeks with a GUI added on top like Linux and a million DEs and incompatible ways of doing the same thing.

 

[MrCrispy]

Why can't Mint/Feren etc just be a collection of DEs, programs and config options packaged like a theme that you apply on top of Ubuntu? Or hell Debian. Is there anything really different in each of these distros other than the settings, bundled apps and the rate at which they pick upstream changes?

 

[BulletDust]

If you want to call clicking the 'download' button on website, then Run, Next a learning process that's fine. Even knowing how to open a program (double click an icon) is something to learn. As is typing.

But you honestly can't compare that with -

- knowing what the GUI for the package manager in your distro of choice is called, if it has a GUI app for that. And those apps are super geeky. e.g. in Mint right now I open it and the first thing I see is 'switch to local mirror?'. Do you have any idea how incomprehensible and scary that is to a casual user? Then find the category for the app, navigate through the hundreds of options and pick one.
- or opening bash, type sudo apt/yum/rpm <package name which you found somewhere>

And how about uninstall? The usual instructions go something like 'go to ~/., rm -rf .prog, rm -rf /usr/local/bin/prog' etc. Again, scary stuff. vs a sane Uninstall program option.

You do have a point that people are used to Windows. But the way it does things isn't wrong, it was designed for casual users, not tech geeks with a GUI added on top like Linux and a million DEs and incompatible ways of doing the same thing.

There's two package variants, deb and rpm. Once you know what package your distro runs, which is usually listed on the downloads page of most software applications, you use that package from that point on - There's nothing difficult about that.

You can download and install using .Deb (.rpm) quite often under Linux now, thus using a graphical interface like Windows. Furthermore .apt is simple copy/paste commands and software can be uninstalled if installed via Gdebi by simply running the downloaded .deb again and selecting uninstall or via the software center > Go to installed packages > Uninstall.

If what you want is a Windows clone, best you stick to Windows as Linux is not Windows.

Nowhere in that comment did I attack precious Windows.

 

[BulletDust]

Since Windows gets virtually every PC gaming title, quality or otherwise while Linux doesn't by a long shot, this point is irrelevant. Desktop Linux isn't getting quality games that Windows isn't, and a lot less.

No one's disputing this point, the relevant point to consider is the fact that people are simply over the issues surrounding Windows and are looking for an alternative. If an individual can switch to Linux and still keep at least 70% of their games, it means they no longer have to deal with Windows 10 and it's numerous issues - This may very well be acceptable to many.

 

[heatlesssun]

No one's disputing this point, the relevant point to consider is the fact that people are simply over the issues surrounding Windows and are looking for an alternative. If an individual can switch to Linux and still keep at least 70% of their games, it means they no longer have to deal with Windows 10 and it's numerous issues - This may very well be acceptable to many.

If someone doesn't want to use Windows, even for gaming, that's perfectly fine. But to claim that Linux is superior to Windows for gaming is nonsensical. Windows has far more games, everything for Linux plus a lot more not on Linux, often Windows has superior performance but Linux is clearly superior because of some games running the ancient Source 2 engine that'll run on an abacus these days?

Again, if people want to game on Linux that's obviously fine but there's the reality of the gaming situation on Linux and there's no realistic way to call it superior to Windows when it's tangibly the opposite.

 

[BulletDust]

Why can't Mint/Feren etc just be a collection of DEs, programs and config options packaged like a theme that you apply on top of Ubuntu? Or hell Debian. Is there anything really different in each of these distros other than the settings, bundled apps and the rate at which they pick upstream changes?

You can do this? The obvious issue here is that you're so used to Windows that you're struggling to adapt to something different.

You need to consider the fact that there was a time where you were lost with Windows also, but you eventually worked it out.

 

[BulletDust]

If someone doesn't want to use Windows, even for gaming, that's perfectly fine. But to claim that Linux is superior to Windows for gaming is nonsensical. Windows has far more games, everything for Linux plus a lot more not on Linux, often Windows has superior performance but Linux is clearly superior because of some games running the ancient Source 2 engine that'll run on an abacus these days?

Again, if people want to game on Linux that's obviously fine but there's the reality of the gaming situation on Linux and there's no realistic way to call it superior to Windows when it's tangibly the opposite.

I believe that Linux is superior to Windows full stop. If one can run Linux and game, that's a win in my books.

 

[ChadD]

Why can't Mint/Feren etc just be a collection of DEs, programs and config options packaged like a theme that you apply on top of Ubuntu? Or hell Debian. Is there anything really different in each of these distros other than the settings, bundled apps and the rate at which they pick upstream changes?

Well mint does do some things differently then Ubuntu. If you run Nvidia or AMD GPUs installing the non free manufacturers drivers is easier and you can even install with those drivers. Not that ubunutu makes it really difficult but Mint does make that easier... and well of course they are the developers of the Cinnamon desktop.

In the case of Feren ya I agree with you 100% .... fork of a fork of a fork seems a bit silly.

 

[MrCrispy]

You can do this? The obvious issue here is that you're so used to Windows that you're struggling to adapt to something different.

You need to consider the fact that there was a time where you were lost with Windows also, but you eventually worked it out.

No I can't do this - they are separate distros and my question is why do they need to be if they share so much. btw I am not lost with Linux, I use it for many things. The whole mentality in Linux to fork everything, create a new distro just because you can, doesn't help anyone.

 

[BulletDust]

No I can't do this - they are separate distros and my question is why do they need to be if they share so much. btw I am not lost with Linux, I use it for many things. The whole mentality in Linux to fork everything, create a new distro just because you can, doesn't help anyone.

You can add any DE you want to your current distro.

Yes, you can get Ubuntu, for example, as Ubuntu MINT, as Ubuntu MATE or as Ubuntu GNOME - But you can also add the DE to your current distro and select the desired DE on login.

I know you use Linux, but it is obvious you are still a bit lost in terms of familiarisation as a lot of what you're claiming really isn't an issue or can be done. When long term Windows users dabble in Linux one of two outcomes result: The individual either accepts a transitional period and does their best to learn something new, no different to when they first started using Windows; or they get angry, say "why isn't this Windows", blame the OS itself and give up. Nine times out of ten their arguments aren't even really justified.

You're getting angry and blaming the OS because it isn't Windows, stay calm, be reasonable and people will help.

 

[ChadD]

No I can't do this - they are separate distros and my question is why do they need to be if they share so much. btw I am not lost with Linux, I use it for many things. The whole mentality in Linux to fork everything, create a new distro just because you can, doesn't help anyone.

That is only looking at it from a consumer product angle though. Sure a end user with zero linux experience trying to pick a distro is messy.

However the ability to fork is what will ensure Linux wins in the end... the same way Android has won the mobile space.

If Samsung wants to create their own OS... with out spending $5-6 billion (cause it would cost at least that much to build a linux or windows from the ground up) good luck with that. However they can take Linux and spend a small fraction of that customising it for their hardware.

Take for example Android a Linux distro itself although not a GNU running distro. Samsung can take android and build out a version that is very much their own. They also end up feeding back a ton of code into Android development.

In the case of Linux... we have very large commercial companies like Red Hat / Ubuntu / Suse / Oracle / Amazon / Facebook / Google / Intel and many others that all use very customised versions of Linux to either build products like Red Hats RHEL, and other commercial distros like Ubuntu server and Suse. Amazon builds their cloud on it, Facebook and Google build out massive customised data centres. What happens is they all end up working together on the base code. They all contribute to the kernel... new features... and improvements all worked on together.

The newest kernel 4.12 hits shortly and to give you an idea of what I mean;
XFS In Linux 4.12 Adds GETFSMAP Support (they have also added it to the ext4 file system)- submitted by Darrick Wong a Linux programmer working for Oracle
BFQ I/O Scheduler Lands Along With New Kyber - BFQ has been in development for a long time by many companies... also added in 4.12 though is Kyber Facebooks Linux scheduler developed for their data centres.
MD RAID Optimizations - more raid optimisations submitted by Shaohua Li a Linux Raid storage guy working for Facebook
Btrfs Gets RAID 5/6 Fixes - Submitted by Chris Mason who started with oracle and moved to facebook. Facebook uses the Btrfs, as does the commercial version of Suse now by default.
5-Level Paging Work Heads Into Linux - Intel adds a ton of stuff with every kernel update, this one is going to support a stupid amount of memory support for upcoming Intel powered supercomputers
4.12 kernel is to enable KASLR support by default - this feature has been around a long time and most distros have already been defaulting it on... anyway developed by red hat it randomises the location of the kernel in memory for enhanced security.
IOMMU Updates, Optimizations - updates from a bunch of sources including programmers working for Suse, Renesas Electronics, ARM, Samsung... and others.
Livepatching With Linux 4.12 Will Be Faster - submitted by the head of the Suse Kernel team.

I know thats a lot of linking lol. I left out a ton of 4.12 stuff cause I tried to just pull some of the highlights from features and enhancements provided by companies building their own distros either for themselves or to give away or sell support for. (yes it means some guy sitting in a basement may decide to spin a version of Ubuntu using Facebooks file system and scheduler or some other nonsense... still its cool that millions of dollars of Facebook R&D is free to use by anyone)

Without the ability to "Fork" Linux and create their own distros for their own needs. None of those companies would be working together like this. The amount of $ being spent on Linux every day is mind numbing. In the long run a company like MS doesn't have enough $ to compete (yes I'm serious). They can't out develop every other company in the world combined... which is sort of what its turning into. (never mind that MS spends a lot on Linux development themselves).

For end users installing Linux on hardware that didn't ship with it ... ya its confusing and their are 1001 options. I don't mind... but I don't ever expect GNU/Linux to ever be mainstream. No the distros we know and love will never be on every ones machine. Ubuntu is trying to win OEMs over... but really its going to take one company to take the linux code and fork it into a commercial OS. I mean that is what ChromeOS is... its a stripped down version of Gentoo heavily modded by Google.

 

[Vermillion]

No I can't do this - they are separate distros and my question is why do they need to be if they share so much. btw I am not lost with Linux, I use it for many things. The whole mentality in Linux to fork everything, create a new distro just because you can, doesn't help anyone.

Except that forking and or building a new distro can lead to better things. I don't like Ubuntu. Never really have. It always felt "slow" and bloated to me. Now that's subjective but it's how I feel. Mint is no different to me. However, Arch is fantastic and it's forks are rather nice. I don't use the forks because I don't want to be handheld. I learned much about Linux by building Arch from the ground up (and dabbling in Gentoo, never again mind you). However, distros like Manjaro allow people to Arch when those people don't want to build Arch from the ground up (lazy bastards I kid, i kid!).

Now go look at Solus. It's a built from the ground up, "new" distro compared to things like Ubuntu and it's derivatives but I think it's a far superior distro and it will only keep getting more and more popular. I think their founder Ikey has a great plan. I hope some of the things Ikey has put in Solus move over to Arch and other distros. For example the clr-boot-manager. Wonderful piece of code for making kernel upgrades bulletproof. It's from Intel's Clear Linux project and it's part of Solus now. Budgie was written by Ikey. Without the Gnome stack Budgie wouldn't exist. Although now that Qt 5.9 has dropped Ikey will begin moving Budgie to Qt and thus removing the Gnome stack dependencies (which will be wonderful).

This is why forking or a new distro isn't necessarily a bad thing. There are times when forking isn't needed. The kneejerk reaction to fork OpenSSL after Heartbleed is a perfect example. However, a lot of the time forking or new distro creation can lead to bigger and better things.

 

[Frobozz]

If you want to call clicking the 'download' button on website, then Run, Next a learning process that's fine. Even knowing how to open a program (double click an icon) is something to learn. As is typing.

But you honestly can't compare that with -

- knowing what the GUI for the package manager in your distro of choice is called, if it has a GUI app for that. And those apps are super geeky. e.g. in Mint right now I open it and the first thing I see is 'switch to local mirror?'. Do you have any idea how incomprehensible and scary that is to a casual user? Then find the category for the app, navigate through the hundreds of options and pick one.
- or opening bash, type sudo apt/yum/rpm <package name which you found somewhere>

And how about uninstall? The usual instructions go something like 'go to ~/., rm -rf .prog, rm -rf /usr/local/bin/prog' etc. Again, scary stuff. vs a sane Uninstall program option.

You do have a point that people are used to Windows. But the way it does things isn't wrong, it was designed for casual users, not tech geeks with a GUI added on top like Linux and a million DEs and incompatible ways of doing the same thing.

Your uninstallation example is the same as Windows. <being ridiculous> First you remember where you installed the program.. Program Files or perhaps Program Files (x86) then delete it. Next you open regedit (because you intuitively know what it is) and then go delete related product registry keys and hope you don't delete the wrong thing. #scary. </being ridiculous> Or, you would use the documented and provided Uninstaller. All of the package managers have remove functionality.

The Windows experience was designed by developers/engineers of the 90s for what they thought the casual user of the day could handle. I believe the type of people making up the category of "casual user" has changed. It's not until mobile (iPhone really) that anyone has seriously rethought the user experience for software installation.

edit: and I think I said it earlier that I agree that the software installation story needs improvement. Especially if you're defining the casual user as my grandmother.

 

[NoOther]

Linux is superior. Windows is second class. There is nothing technically superior about windows at all in anyway shape or form. Linux file managers vary cause there are more then one but most are superior to explorer which is only good at allowing noobs to F their systems up.

That is not actually true. AD is far superior to what Linux has to offer right now, the shadow file system in Windows is better, and MS Office is still the best office package out. Other than those however, I would agree.

 

[heatlesssun]

I believe that Linux is superior to Windows full stop. If one can run Linux and game, that's a win in my books.

When you're talking about something as complex as Windows and Linux there's no way for either one is clearly superior in every aspect of what's possible with PCs. Each clearly has it's strengths and weaknesses with many, many years of user experience, particularly Windows. Of course things have changed with both, I get the telemetry and privacy concerns of Windows 10 but the essence of Windows x86, it's large and well developed desktop ecosystem are still there.

And sure gaming is possible under desktop Linux and if Linux gaming works for those that want to use it then sure that's a win. I think it's also a win that Windows gaming is bigger and stronger than ever and developing a entirely new gaming ecosystem under VR.

 

[ChadD]

That is not actually true. AD is far superior to what Linux has to offer right now, the shadow file system in Windows is better, and MS Office is still the best office package out. Other than those however, I would agree.

Well AD is easier to setup I'll give them that... nothing you can't do with Linux, but sure I won't argue that AD is easier for most people.. ok everyone really Linux options take more work no doubt to setup. (mostly cause Linux solutions can't make as many assumptions out of the box).

Office... I don't know it can't even open standard file formats properly I don't see the charm in that.

Shadow Copy... well you can support it through Samba and using a snapshoting Linux FS like XFS or BtrFS. I will say yes ext4 is missing snapshots... still if that is important to you you can run SUSE as it defaults to BtrFS, or you can choose to use XFS. Again MS simply makes it a bit easier for home users. Although for home users Apples new file system is still much better... and on par with some of the Enterprise class snapshoting file systems.

Not that I mean to argue... agreeing on everything else is pretty darn good. lol

 

[NoOther]

Well AD is easier to setup I'll give them that... nothing you can't do with Linux, but sure I won't argue that AD is easier for most people.. ok everyone really Linux options take more work no doubt to setup. (mostly cause Linux solutions can't make as many assumptions out of the box).

Office... I don't know it can't even open standard file formats properly I don't see the charm in that.

Shadow Copy... well you can support it through Samba and using a snapshoting Linux FS like XFS or BtrFS. I will say yes ext4 is missing snapshots... still if that is important to you you can run SUSE as it defaults to BtrFS, or you can choose to use XFS. Again MS simply makes it a bit easier for home users. Although for home users Apples new file system is still much better... and on par with some of the Enterprise class snapshoting file systems.

Not that I mean to argue... agreeing on everything else is pretty darn good. lol

There is plenty in AD that takes far more effort to do in Linux. That is why there are programs out there like Centrify making boatloads of money to integrate into the AD structure. Linux does not have a full fledged Directory service on par with AD. You have to piece together a number of different solutions that aren't as centrally organized or managed as AD.

MS Office has far more functionality than any other office product, that can't even be argued.

Again, sure there are things you can get for Linux that can do similar functions, but again that is getting together a lot of different stuff to do a solution Windows Servers can do with an easy click of a few buttons.

There are some other things that Windows still does better than Linux, but that point it would be nitpicking. And honestly there is far more I think that Linux can do better than Windows so they aren't really worth mentioning when the balance is in Linux's favor imho. I will say though for Enterprise setups, Windows does have the edge simply because of the ease of setup and integration that has been expanded on for decades now where Linux hasn't had as much focus there.

 

[B00nie]

Well AD is easier to setup I'll give them that... nothing you can't do with Linux, but sure I won't argue that AD is easier for most people.. ok everyone really Linux options take more work no doubt to setup. (mostly cause Linux solutions can't make as many assumptions out of the box).

Office... I don't know it can't even open standard file formats properly I don't see the charm in that.

Shadow Copy... well you can support it through Samba and using a snapshoting Linux FS like XFS or BtrFS. I will say yes ext4 is missing snapshots... still if that is important to you you can run SUSE as it defaults to BtrFS, or you can choose to use XFS. Again MS simply makes it a bit easier for home users. Although for home users Apples new file system is still much better... and on par with some of the Enterprise class snapshoting file systems.

Not that I mean to argue... agreeing on everything else is pretty darn good. lol

I remember when I went to AD training at my previous employment. They told that only 5 persons in the company had rights to access AD and they were not allowed to join a car or an aeroplane simultaneously. This was because one false move would disable every workstation in the AD domain so access was strictly limited.

Sounds easy and simple. And secure

 

[NoOther]

I remember when I went to AD training at my previous employment. They told that only 5 persons in the company had rights to access AD and they were not allowed to join a car or an aeroplane simultaneously. This was because one false move would disable every workstation in the AD domain so access was strictly limited.

Sounds easy and simple. And secure

Sounds like a poor configuration or integration. AD itself is pretty easy to setup and implement.

 

[B00nie]

Sounds like a poor configuration or integration. AD itself is pretty easy to setup and implement.

Perhaps deceptively easy.

 

[heatlesssun]

I remember when I went to AD training at my previous employment. They told that only 5 persons in the company had rights to access AD and they were not allowed to join a car or an aeroplane simultaneously. This was because one false move would disable every workstation in the AD domain so access was strictly limited.

Sounds easy and simple. And secure

What does one false move mean? And of course top level AD access is TIGHTLY controlled because yeah, security.

 

[MrCrispy]

Your uninstallation example is the same as Windows. <being ridiculous> First you remember where you installed the program.. Program Files or perhaps Program Files (x86) then delete it. Next you open regedit (because you intuitively know what it is) and then go delete related product registry keys and hope you don't delete the wrong thing. #scary. </being ridiculous> Or, you would use the documented and provided Uninstaller. All of the package managers have remove functionality.

The Windows experience was designed by developers/engineers of the 90s for what they thought the casual user of the day could handle. I believe the type of people making up the category of "casual user" has changed. It's not until mobile (iPhone really) that anyone has seriously rethought the user experience for software installation.

edit: and I think I said it earlier that I agree that the software installation story needs improvement. Especially if you're defining the casual user as my grandmother.

Why the hell would anyone uninstall manually in Windows? There's no system wide uninstaller in Linux because there's no standardization. And no not all package managers do a good job. Just read the uninstall instructions. I'm a web developer so I'm not your typical user, but just as an example read the install/uninstall steps for things like Docker/Nodejs for Windows vs Linux and you'll see how insane things are in Linux. Adding ppa's, keychains, certs, you have to jump through hoops.

 

[Frobozz]

Why the hell would anyone uninstall manually in Windows? There's no system wide uninstaller in Linux because there's no standardization. And no not all package managers do a good job. Just read the uninstall instructions. I'm a web developer so I'm not your typical user, but just as an example read the install/uninstall steps for things like Docker/Nodejs for Windows vs Linux and you'll see how insane things are in Linux. Adding ppa's, keychains, certs, you have to jump through hoops.

the absurdity is what I was trying to highlight... I had some rebuttal about standardized system wide installer/uninstallers being on most Linux distributions. zypper, apt, yum, etc..., but I think I'm going to just bow out now. #fedoratip

 

[ChadD]

Why the hell would anyone uninstall manually in Windows? There's no system wide uninstaller in Linux because there's no standardization. And no not all package managers do a good job. Just read the uninstall instructions. I'm a web developer so I'm not your typical user, but just as an example read the install/uninstall steps for things like Docker/Nodejs for Windows vs Linux and you'll see how insane things are in Linux. Adding ppa's, keychains, certs, you have to jump through hoops.

One of the silliest things I have heard. Yes if you don't install Linux software properly you will have to remove it by hand. I have no idea what crap Distro you where running but both Docker and Nodejs would install through my package manager... and it would remove them completely with one click.

Suggesting that Windows has a unified installation method... or uninstall method is odd. Linux does have lots of standardisation.... standards are the ONLY thing that allow Linux to work at all. As a web developer I would expect you appreciate that. When things don't conform to standards they don't work properly. If they conform 100% they should work on every standard compliant system.

Of course their are distros that don't have nice clean install methods for every bit of Linux software... sure I guess if you want to skip a Distros database and force install a newer version of something then they have access to or something you may have to mess around removing it by hand as well. It sounds like you are a developer who tried to use a LTS distro... if you want the latest GIT version of software for development purposes ect run a Rolling Distro instead so your Package manager can do its job for you even on stuff less then an hour old. Arch / Gentoo / Suse Tumbleweed / Debian dev branch have advantages for development.

 

[BulletDust]

MS Office has far more functionality than any other office product, that can't even be argued.

MS Office is the least compatible office suite around, completely unable to conform to standards that exist for a reason - It's the worlds least compatible Office suite marketed as the worlds most compatible office suite - I still can't believe people actually fall for that! Furthermore, it's increased functionality is used by a mere fraction of it's user base - Most of the time it types up a letter or makes a simple spreadsheet. Hardly a good argument for sticking with Windows.

There is plenty in AD that takes far more effort to do in Linux. That is why there are programs out there like Centrify making boatloads of money to integrate into the AD structure. Linux does not have a full fledged Directory service on par with AD. You have to piece together a number of different solutions that aren't as centrally organized or managed as AD.

There's packages like Puppet that apply AD like control to Linux making centralised management far easier in corporate environments, personally I think AD is one of the most abused features of Windows and comparable to the overuse of Excel for situations where a spreadsheet package isn't the most ideal tool for the job - What has a corporate environment got to do with a beginners variant of Linux anyway? If gaining full AD benefits under Linux means running a registry like Windows, than I think Linux is just fine without full AD support and solutions like puppet are more than acceptable as the registry is a downright disaster in my opinion.

I know sysadmins that work in animation/special effects industries running nothing but Linux clusters and workstations and i can tell you right now they'd shut you down in a heartbeat regarding your argument that Windows is easier to manage in corporate environments. They actually find Linux far easier to manage in such situations and the users of the front-end workstations don't even realise they aren't running Windows.

Furthermore, the application of GP and thus the editing of the registry doesn't seem to be working so well under Windows 10, with the OS actually ignoring certain settings that matter.

Sounds like a poor configuration or integration. AD itself is pretty easy to setup and implement.

Hence the problem with Windows, the second you make things easier for the masses and therefore easier to setup and implement, you also increase the potential for security issues and accidents - But as stated in my above post, I have no idea what a corporate environment has to do with Feren OS.

When you're talking about something as complex as Windows and Linux there's no way for either one is clearly superior in every aspect of what's possible with PCs. Each clearly has it's strengths and weaknesses with many, many years of user experience, particularly Windows. Of course things have changed with both, I get the telemetry and privacy concerns of Windows 10 but the essence of Windows x86, it's large and well developed desktop ecosystem are still there.

We don't use PC's, we use operating systems. As far as operating systems are concerned, in my opinion Windows is a flawed and less superior product to Linux and actually reduces my efficiency when using the machine. People are switching to Linux to get away from the numerous issues surrounding Windows 10, this is a fact, and if they can do that while still retaining ~70% of their games, that makes Linux an even greater possibility in such situations. Furthermore, development is ongoing, and while Linux continues to improve Windows appears to be going backwards.

Why the hell would anyone uninstall manually in Windows? There's no system wide uninstaller in Linux because there's no standardization. And no not all package managers do a good job. Just read the uninstall instructions. I'm a web developer so I'm not your typical user, but just as an example read the install/uninstall steps for things like Docker/Nodejs for Windows vs Linux and you'll see how insane things are in Linux. Adding ppa's, keychains, certs, you have to jump through hoops.

sudo add-apt repository [PPA]
sudo apt update
sudo apt install [NAME]

Are you telling me that's difficult because it's not GUI based? Are you serious?

Installing software under Linux, this is not hard:

APT:



DEB:



To remove software:

APT:

sudo apt remove [NAME]

DEB:

Remove via GUI using the same installer you used to install the software, usually Gdebi.

Alternatively, in the case of packaged distro's, you can usually remove everything via the GUI software centre and clicking 'remove'.

I see nothing difficult about the above procedures and standardisation sucks, I see the standardisation of Windows as a negative, not a positive - However there is more than one way to install software under Windows. I've never had a single issue with a package manager, your arguments are odd and largely unfounded.

 

[heatlesssun]

MS Office is the least compatible office suite around, completely unable to conform to standards that exist for a reason - It's the worlds least compatible Office suite marketed as the worlds most compatible office suite - I still can't believe people actually fall for that! Furthermore, it's increased functionality is used by a mere fraction of it's user base - Most of the time it types up a letter or makes a simple spreadsheet. Hardly a good argument for sticking with Windows.

You keep talking about Office compatibility with other suites but a lot of that really has to do with features and not file formats. Like ink, something that LibreOffice is just now sort of supporting but that had nothing to do with the file format. Ink is just something that's much better supported functionally in MS Office than any other office suite. And this is nothing new, Microsoft has been supporting ink in Office for 15 years now.

 

[heatlesssun]

We don't use PC's, we use operating systems.

When I use my Vive I'm using the Vive, not Windows. Windows just connects the hardware to the software system and provides a runtime environment for the particular VR application and other software layers needed to make that application run. That hardware and those software layers are no different if I were using the Vive under Linux. The internals of those software layers are obviously different because of the different runtime environment of Linux. But the process is still the same, tracking info from the HMD and controllers that feeds the input of the application which renders a 3D image in 2D that's then sent to a VR warping engine that projects the image into the HMD.

As much as we debate this stuff a significant part of how all this stuff we use across these platforms isn't inherently different.

 

[ChadD]

When I use my Vive I'm using the Vive, not Windows.

I'll remember that the next time you scream about VR VR VR in a thread that has nothing to do with even gaming.

 

[heatlesssun]

I'll remember that the next time you scream about VR VR VR in a thread that has nothing to do with even gaming.

LOL! You totally missed the point on that one. In a full VR app/simulation there are no desktop OS constructs, no mouse, no keyboard, no windows (pun intended). The underlying technology that makes it all work vanishes from ones very sight intentionally. As I've always stated, it's only folks like you and others that really give a shit about desktop operating systems. The reason I get dinged by folks like you in these discussions is because I love Windows, I love what it supports.

The classic definition of a computer operating system is this: The software that supports a computer's basic functions, such as scheduling tasks, executing applications, and controlling peripherals. Windows is exceptionally strong in the executing applications department.

 

[BulletDust]

When I use my Vive I'm using the Vive, not Windows. Windows just connects the hardware to the software system and provides a runtime environment for the particular VR application and other software layers needed to make that application run. That hardware and those software layers are no different if I were using the Vive under Linux. The internals of those software layers are obviously different because of the different runtime environment of Linux. But the process is still the same, tracking info from the HMD and controllers that feeds the input of the application which renders a 3D image in 2D that's then sent to a VR warping engine that projects the image into the HMD.

As much as we debate this stuff a significant part of how all this stuff we use across these platforms isn't inherently different.

Your Vive does not bypass the OS, you are still using Windows, it is impossible for you to interface directly with the machine via UEFI.

When you use a PC you use the OS, it is the most important part of the overall computing experience as without it the PC is a brick.

You are right in relation to PC usage case however. Considering the bulk of the population, the expectation in relation to their usage case is not inherently different between platforms - Hence the reason why Linux is a more than viable option in this day and age for many.

The strength of an OS in relation to executing applications is purely based on usage case, you constantly overstate usage case.

 

[ChadD]

LOL! You totally missed the point on that one. In a full VR app/simulation there are no desktop OS constructs, no mouse, no keyboard, no windows (pun intended). The underlying technology that makes it all work vanishes from ones very sight intentionally. As I've always stated, it's only folks like you and others that really give a shit about desktop operating systems. The reason I get dinged by folks like you in these discussions is because I love Windows, I love what it supports.

The classic definition of a computer operating system is this: The software that supports a computer's basic functions, such as scheduling tasks, executing applications, and controlling peripherals. Windows is exceptionally strong in the executing applications department.

You are confusing a UI with an actual disk operating system.

 

[heatlesssun]

Your Vive does not bypass the OS, you are still using Windows, it is impossible for you to interface directly with the machine via UEFI.

I never said anything about bypassing the OS, I said that the normal constructs of a desktop OS don't exist.

When you use a PC you use the OS, it is the most important part of the overall computing experience as without it the PC is a brick.

One uses hardware and applications, the OS gives a runtime platform for those provides the command and control elements for other tasks like installing and launching applications, settings, etc.

You are right in relation to PC usage case however. Considering the bulk of the population, the expectation in relation to their usage case is not inherently different between platforms - Hence the reason why Linux is a more than viable option in this day and age for many.

Exactly and I've never argued that. However if an OS doesn't support what a person wants to do, so much for being superior.

The strength of an OS in relation to executing applications is purely based on usage case, you constantly overstate usage case.

I simply point out that with 1.5 billions Windows PCs out there one can make any generalized case for use they want, you'll still miss countless millions in that simply because not you, not I nor any one person can possibly account for every single thing such a large group of people do.

 

[heatlesssun]

You are confusing a UI with an actual disk operating system.

Operating systems support a great deal more than disks.

 

[BulletDust]

I never said anything about bypassing the OS, I said that the normal constructs of a desktop OS don't exist.

To launch VR you interacted with the OS installed on your machine. Without the OS installed on your machine launching VR would not be possible. VR is but one application of your PC, it is undisputable that an OS must exist for the user to interact with the machine at a basic level and that makes the OS a key point in any user experience with the machine. The OS is not invisible.

ne uses hardware and applications, the OS gives a runtime platform for those provides the command and control elements for other tasks like installing and launching applications, settings, etc.

And it does this by providing an environment for the user to interact with, the OS is not invisible and is an integral part of any user experience with the machine.

Exactly and I've never argued that. However if an OS doesn't support what a person wants to do, so much for being superior.

And the bulk of the population have needs that do not in any way whatsoever exceed the practicality of Linux, Windows is not necessary for a complete user experience anymore considering the masses.

I simply point out that with 1.5 billions Windows PCs out there one can make any generalized case for use they want, you'll still miss countless millions in that simply because not you, not I nor any one person can possibly account for every single thing such a large group of people do.

And I never stated otherwise.

Operating systems support a great deal more than disks.

ChadD knows this, you seem to be the one stating otherwise because of VR.

 

[MrCrispy]

the absurdity is what I was trying to highlight... I had some rebuttal about standardized system wide installer/uninstallers being on most Linux distributions. zypper, apt, yum, etc..., but I think I'm going to just bow out now. #fedoratip

Sorry I'm not trying to be combative but I do think there is an issue here. Like you said each major flavor of Linux has its own package manager, a different GUI front end, and often those are not enough.

btw here are the official install instructions for Docker on Ubuntu - https://docs.docker.com/engine/installation/linux/ubuntu/#install-using-the-repository
sudo apt get is the last step after doing many other things.

 

[MrCrispy]

Also anyone who things typing commands in terminal, even if they seem easy to you, is easier for a regular user than running a Gui installer they get from a website, has never really had to work with a non techy user. Try telling people to 'run ver in a command prompt to find out the version number', and see how they respond - I'm deliberately using a Windows example to illustrate the point.

 

[heatlesssun]

To launch VR you interacted with the OS installed on your machine.

Actually you can do that in the Steam client and it works the same way with Linux and Windows, well it does now, there was a weird Linux bug on that one: http://phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Steam-Beta-31-May-2017

Without the OS installed on your machine launching VR would not be possible.

Exactly, according, that's the classic definition of an operating system which I've pointed out many times and the big weakness in desktop Linux folks like you just gloss over. If the OS doesn't support it then the OS is useless for that task. 2000000000000000+ agreed.

VR is but one application of your PC,

VR isn't an application, it's an input and display system.

it is undisputable that an OS must exist for the user to interact with the machine at a basic level and that makes the OS a key point in any user experience with the machine. The OS is not invisible.

The constructs of a conventional OS are completely hidden in pure VR applications. There is no mouse, no monitor, no keyboard, not physically anyway.

And it does this by providing an environment for the user to interact with, the OS is not invisible and is an integral part of any user experience with the machine.

Acordinf to ChadD, most PC users are just using a Chrome browser so yeah the OS is mostly invisible even in that common scenario.

And the bulk of the population have needs that do not in any way whatsoever exceed the practicality of Linux, Windows is not necessary for a complete user experience anymore considering the masses.

Except when they do. The thing about this argument, I've been around computers of all types for well nearly 40 years, no one is drawn into the thing that does less or supports less within an existing product line. For all of its faults Windows supports a metric ton of shit most people have never seen. Like PC VR.

And I never stated otherwise.

Well you seem to be quick to dismiss anyone that has needs or wants that are in alignment with what you think is relevant. I thank God I didn't need Linux folks to sign off on VR.

ChadD knows this, you seem to be the one stating otherwise because of VR.

Huh? I said that the normal constructs of existing OSes are invisible to pure VR applications. Where's the 3D controller support in a desktop OS currently? That's right, pointless for a 2D monitor.

 

[BulletDust]

Also anyone who things typing commands in terminal, even if they seem easy to you, is easier for a regular user than running a Gui installer they get from a website, has never really had to work with a non techy user. Try telling people to 'run ver in a command prompt to find out the version number', and see how they respond - I'm deliberately using a Windows example to illustrate the point.

My Mum can copy/paste commands to install software, from memory I think I've had to use 'run ver' possibly never, so as can be assumed it's a step my mother has never had to tackle based around her usage: Most of the time she installs what she needs from the Software Centre. I've posted video evidence highlighting just how remarkably simple it is to install software via apt and gdebi, what you've cherry picked here as an example of installing software under Linux is something as stated I've possibly done once in my life and most of the differences regarding your example to a standard apt install are related to apt over https - Having said that the entire procedure is still copy/paste. Once again, there are still a great many functions under macOS that absolutely require the use of the terminal, admittedly nothing like your extreme example, but people can cope with the terminal just fine - When they can't they ring a tech for assistance and as a tech myself users ring people like me to troubleshoot their Windows installs regarding procedures exactly like this all the time.

You have to understand, Linux is not controlled the way Windows is, if someone wants to fork a distro or create an alternate package manager they're perfectly able to do so. All that matters is that you familiarise yourself with your chosen distro and it's package manager (of which there is only really two, .deb and .rpm) and follow the installation instructions appropriate for your chosen distro and it's package manager. There's more than one way to install software under Windows, I can't see what's so hard about this logic?

The fact Linux is not locked down to a particular UI and package management is a strength of the operating system, not a weakness. With the advent of Windows 10 the issues surrounding a locked down proprietary OS are only now really starting to become evident, to the point that I believe it may be the downfall of Windows within the next 10 or so years.

 

[BulletDust]

Actually you can do that in the Steam client and it works the same way with Linux and Windows, well it does now, there was a weird Linux bug on that one: http://phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Steam-Beta-31-May-2017

I think we're all fairly well versed in the launching of VR, I actually posted a thread regarding this update in the Linux forums last night. The fact you're deliberately avoiding is that you are not running SteamOS, so Steam is a software application in your scenario requiring the use of an OS to run - When you logged into that PC you interacted with the UI of that OS, the OS is therefore not invisible and a large, important and integral part of PC usage.

Exactly, according, that's the classic definition of an operating system which I've pointed out many times and the big weakness in desktop Linux folks like you just gloss over. If the OS doesn't support it then the OS is useless for that task. 2000000000000000+ agreed.

Depending on personal usage cases. As I keep hammering home, you constantly overstate the importance of Windows regarding the masses - I am not going to explain this to you again. In this day and age a realistic alternative now exists in comparison to Windows considering personal usage.

VR isn't an application, it's an input and display system.

Steam is an application, in your case steam is by no means a stand alone OS. I'm struggling to comprehend how you can't grasp this concept, my only conclusion is that you are deliberately avoiding admitting this simple fact.

The constructs of a conventional OS are completely hidden in pure VR applications. There is no mouse, no monitor, no keyboard, not physically anyway.

And yet it still requires an OS to run. I can see that you're attempting to highlight that I know nothing about VR, it's not working.

Acordinf to ChadD, most PC users are just using a Chrome browser so yeah the OS is mostly invisible even in that common scenario.

And yet Chrome is not, in this case, a stand alone OS. The OS is a very real, large, integral and important part of PC usage. It is not invisible and therefore absolutely cannot be ignored. It is the UI by which the user interacts with the machine on a basic level, VR or not.

Except when they do. The thing about this argument, I've been around computers of all types for well nearly 40 years, no one is drawn into the thing that does less or supports less within an existing product line. For all of its faults Windows supports a metric ton of shit most people have never seen. Like PC VR.

So does Linux, all that matters is whether the OS supports an individuals personal usage case and this is where you constantly overstate the necessity of Windows in modern computing. I've also used and been trained/incredibly involved with a vast number of computing devices/operating systems over the last 35 years, not too sure on the relevance of such a point though?

Well you seem to be quick to dismiss anyone that has needs or wants that are in alignment with what you think is relevant. I thank God I didn't need Linux folks to sign off on VR.

Not at all, I just live and work in the real world with real PC users. I don't praise Microsoft in a situation where they don't deserve it. Your experience regarding Linux users is totally a result of your own attitude and context in discussions. If you were in front of me talking about the sky with an attitude like the one portrayed here my own attitude and therefore the outcome of the discussion would be exactly the same.

I call a spade a spade.

Huh? I said that the normal constructs of existing OSes are invisible to pure VR applications. Where's the 3D controller support in a desktop OS currently? That's right, pointless for a 2D monitor.

VR applications are a software application running on top of the OS, the UI ised to interact with the machine, a large, important and integral part of PC usage that cannot be ignored - I am repeating this over and over for a very good reason.

Are we gonna do another round? Why are you so opposed to people using Linux as opposed to Windows? If you think I'm exaggerating the usefulness of Linux as a user of a great many operating systems you couldn't be more wrong.

It's like you personally take offence to the fact not everyone sings the praises of Microsoft where praises are not deserved?

 

[Frobozz]

Sorry I'm not trying to be combative but I do think there is an issue here. Like you said each major flavor of Linux has its own package manager, a different GUI front end, and often those are not enough.

btw here are the official install instructions for Docker on Ubuntu - https://docs.docker.com/engine/installation/linux/ubuntu/#install-using-the-repository
sudo apt get is the last step after doing many other things.

It's Docker. Might as well hold up MS SQL Server for an example of typical Windows software.
For the scope of people looking into containerization, those install instructions are easy and straight forward.

I think I've agreed with you a few times that software installation is not the most polished experience. Each of the UIs and package managers are attempts at solving that problem. However, being that you can't be fired from putting ideas out into the world, once a group feels their solution has traction and someone disagrees, they're free to pursue their idea as well. It'd be like getting a few international coalitions together to organize my kitchen. There wouldn't be consensus, but several valid proposals to choose from.

I'm fairly sure my grandma is not going to be installing Docker anytime soon, nor SQL Server. She will however, max out the storage of your iPad. (Though you never know... those developer workshops at the civic center...)

Defining the user base determines where the goal posts are. Somewhere in between, or do we really need my grandmother installing Docker? (rhetorical question)

... Now I'm out.