No.17480
>>17479Linux is a clone of Unix. Unix was user hostile. All freetards know how to do is copy, even if it's a bad thing that they're copying (which they excuse away with their usual copes.) They are the most profoundly uncreative and unoriginal people in tech.
No.17481
>>174808.5/10 bait, now fuck off
No.17482
>>17481Sincere opinion, not bait. Thanks for the rating tho.
No.17483
>>17480exactly, if they cant create a compiler from scratch, they are just larpers
No.17485
>>17482Ok continue to suck the cock of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs if you want fucking necrophiliac, we don't need to hear about your filthy fantasies so again fuck off and enjoy running a black box that needs to reboot to be updated.
No.17486
>>17485relax friend, you are getting worked up about nothing.
Linux still sucks tho.
No.17487
>>17479>Why is Linux so user-hostile?it's not, it's empowering the user more than most operating systems
it's maybe less newbie-friendly, but not all users are newbies.
>It feels like it was specifically designed by programmers so that they can feel superior to us common folks.It's designed to be really configurable.
If you don't want to configure it, install a newbie friendly distro like mint
>>17480>Linux is a clone of Unix.in the beginning, sure , but it grew far beyond that.
>All freetards know how to do is copyI see more innovation and original ideas in the free-software-world than in the proprietary sphere.
No.17488
>>17486Everything sucks, you are new to life or what? Fuck off and don't forget to kill yourself.
No.17489
>>17488No, I enjoy life— life is good. You apparently don't. Sad.
And yes, people like you make others want to stay the fuck away from Linux and Linux enthusiasts.
No.17490
>>17486>Linux still sucks tho.It sucks less than the proprietary alternatives, and it's very open, you could make it not suck.
>>17489>I enjoy lifeYou enjoy bitching about free software ?
No.17491
>>17487>it's not, it's empowering the user more than most operating systemsyeah, sure, the error messages OP posted are so empowering and not written by a supercilious little nerd at all.
>It's designed to be really configurableand yes, troubleshooting a broken system is configuring it.
>I see more innovation and original ideas in the free-software-world than in the proprietary sphere.hey, they bent the fork prongs. That made it original. Who cares about usability?
>>17490>You enjoy bitching about free software ?I enjoy sincerely expressing myself.
No.17492
>>17489Wagecuck is happy to write code for Microshit or Apple, "yah I get my $100k check writing code I will never own and that fiat money will be worth nothing in a few months, I love life guizes! Also what is a Lisp? What do you mean RMS invented VS Code 50 years ago?"
Oh wait you are a useless piece of shit who doesn't know how to code, just a gamer who doesn't know how to do shit except consoom readymade products, and have stupid annoying opinions to waste everyone time, because you are yourself at the core, a waste of time for everyone involved in whatever you do. Goodbye.
No.17493
>>17492Oh good, please write more "free software" for a university that will get plagiarized by a major corporation, and encourage others to slave away for nothing. Please continue to believe that your silly little licenses have legal authority or potential to change the world.
You are considerably less intelligent than a proprietary app developer who gets decent money selling his creation on the apple store. That's why you have to pretend that everyone who bursts your little fantasy bubble is a gamer or a "consooomer"
No.17494
>>17493>dude you aren't le smart capitalist selling trinkets on le iStore lmaookay mask is off, now please fuck off and go back to /pol/, we don't need to hear the sounds of (You) slurping on Elon Musk's cock.
No.17495
>>17494lmao. I knew you'd hang around after saying goodbye.
>fuck off to /pol/No. For me, leftypol is home, please fuck off to /g/. What you advocate encourages exploitation way more than my valid criticism of freetards like yourself
Also, knock it off with whole cocksucking business. It doesn't make you look tough in the slightest, you slobbering little dweeb.
No.17497
Linux is a kernel. Get a sane distro. Also "user-friendly" is a more condescending concept than anything else. It implies people need their freedom disabled to be helped like a baby by the good all-knowing corporate technocrats.
No.17498
>>17495How is selling your labor power (coding ability) to a corporation empowering? That's what I do for a living, so please explain.
No.17499
>>17498it isn't very empowering, but writing the same amount of code for free is even less so. Hope that clears it up.
No.17500
Also "freetards" fixed C++ by creating Rust, so please respect the countless hours of labor that got into it, thanks
No.17501
The people who made these propably want to keep it out of the mainstream so it can stay "pure" (propably while complaining about it not becoming mainstream)
No.17502
>>17499Not my fault if you got exploited by your university, doesn't make a case in favor of proprietary software in the slightest.
No.17503
>>17497None of the freedom that linux provides by the virtue of having its code available is useful to the average end-user, but having fewer errors (and less condescending error messages) definitely is.
No.17504
>>17502It's a systemic rather than a purely personal problem. My point is that the free software movement has little to do with ending exploitation.
No.17506
>>17504Cope. Being in control of the software you run on your machine is more empowering than your silly shitposts about "muh working for free". You still haven't made a good argument in favor of running black boxes on your machine besides "muh UX". Life isn't a perfect ideal existence, you should know this if you were a Marxist and not a corporate shill doing it for free.
No.17507
>>17506are you
really in control of your linux box? can you audit every line of code that runs on it? Not even the entire free software community can do that.
Posts about big corporations being the prime beneficiaries of the modern source-available software aren't shitposts, but a very valid concern. And UX is important, if not the most important thing about software. Programs are tools, first and foremost.
No.17508
>>17507No, of course there are Intel wagecucks pushing code on the main branch that barely anyone can understand. So does that means the goal of free software isn't a laudable one, as you were arguing earlier? Let's all sell our labor power to corporations selling black boxes, that will surely fix the problem! I yearn for the days when Pascal compilers cost $500 and there were no way to fix them if anything went wrong, those were the days!
No.17509
>>17503Who are you talking to?
No.17510
>>17508No, what I am saying is that everything more or less runs on trust. Putting your trust in the developers of [free software x] isn't a whole lot different than putting it in the developers of [proprietary software y]
All sorts of utopian projects have laudable goals, but you have to look at consequences. And right now, source-available software is more or a less a ploy for corporations getting free labor out of idealistic university students and junior programmers. My solution would be to independently sell software instead of working for a corporation or making your code open-source.
I don't think selling a Pascal compiler for $500 was sustainable in the first place, and I am willing to give some credit to open-source compilers for hastening the end of that.
No.17511
>>17479Computer nerds being unaware not everyone want to indulge in that "hobby" and want an easy clickable GUI OS.
No.17512
>>17511It takes an insane amount of resources to do anything. It's already an amazing achievement of free and open labor that linux is usable by normal non-tech computer users.
No.17513
>>17503>None of the freedom that linux provides by the virtue of having its code available is useful to the average end-userI disagree, even non-technical end-users that can't code still benefit from a software ecosystem that isn't locked down.
>>17511>want an easy clickable GUI OSMany people want that because many people are computer illiterate, similar to people who can't read, prefer books with pictures.
But that is now, eventually computer literacy will rise just like normal literacy did.
Btw: Some Linux distros are very clickable, most Linux users get into terminal because it's really nice.
No.17514
>>17513>eventually computer literacy will rise just like normal literacy did.Basic amounts of it are (essentially, clicking stuff) but do you really think at some point in the relatively near future people will really be computer literate as in linux without GUI? How? Why even?
No.17515
>>17514GUIs can be better, for example in graphic design, or tweaking settings with sliders. However command line interfaces have a significant bonus in flexibility and speed. I think that the only thing holding it back is the lack of feature discoverability. (You have to read manuals or tutorials to find out about functionality). Once we figure this out, it will not take long for computer literacy rates to rise drastically.
No.17517
>>17515GUIs can be improved big time, but I don't think most people will ever get computer literate enough for text-based usage. I mean we didn't get mechanically literate even though it's been important for a long time and much simpler. Maybe because it requires physical resources unlike a computer but not sure. And as I understand it most people using command lines have GUI problems related to issues that could be solved by not being dicks about allowing users to do stuff.
>Once we figure out feature discoverabilityDon't think we will ever solve it unless we start teaching about it in school. Remembering it is also a problem, took me half a year of work to use command line linux for study stuff somewhat fast when half of the time I'm trying to remember what to type. But just like math it will propably be the bare minimum, even then 90% won't ever make use of the more advanced stuff that's taught.
No.17518
>>17517using text-based interfaces isn't computer literacy, it's computer austerity. And much like economic austerity, it's defended by boomers (well back in my days) and the well-indoctrinated (muh Unix Philosophy)
No.17519
>>17516&> /dev/null
>>17517>GUIs can be improved but terminals can notI think you are biased.
>we start teaching about it in schoolthat's also a possibility
No.17520
>>17511GUI depends on use-case
If you want to be able to use barely any sort of function, then GUIs are ideal
If you want to be able to get stuff done, then the harrowing task of getting around scary terminals is needed
No.17521
>>17519your humor isn't funny, nerd. I know more about unix than you do.
>>17520using youtube-dl to download porn isn't "getting stuff done"
No.17522
>>17521do you usually download porn?
No.17523
>>17522No, but linuxfags do.
No.17526
it was made in the 90s by nerds
No.17528
>>17479Silly messages are the darkest crime. I carry the sword and the shield and the armour to banish this aberration back into the darkness from whence it came in order to protect the weak and frail.
No.17531
Choice of words, "user hostile", is perhaps excessively harsh because popular DEs have become quite functional and are very usable, but that UI/UX does seem sometimes to be decently done nowadays only by, yes, the iDevice company is not the most preferable state of affairs. Even commercial competitors to them don't have much better user-interfaces.
And the smiple error messages with text emoticons infuriate no less than poorly phrased syslog entries. Verbosity can be done correctly; contextless infantile "shit broke, pls restart" nonsense is honestly more the annoyance.
The problem *nix has with lack of consumer-end user adoption is likely more that time is valuable and ordinary people at their jobs can't easily spend their hours for adjustment of configs or the setup of their systems for basic activities; even high-tech corps. have their regular graphical workstations be the popularly used but proprietary OSes and SSH for *nix. Likely this issue of proprietary OS dominance won't be resolved while proprietary market dominance maintains inertia, so at the end of the day there are no easy fixes within capitalism.
No.17532
>>17531>The problem *nix has with lack of consumer-end user adoption is likely more that time is valuable and ordinary people at their jobs can't easily spend their hours for adjustment of configs or the setup of their systems for basic activities;I don't think so as you also have the failure of BeOS along with Japan having their own graphical operating systems that got phased out for Windows. I think it is more the Windows juggernaut and that nobody got fired from choosing Windows despite Windows user interface being junk.
No.17533
>>17519Well, I didn't say text inputs can't be improved but now that you mention it, wouldn't text prediction and hotkeys (already exist) too make it a massively easier
No.17534
>>17528they are not silly or funny, they are condescending.
No.17535
>>17479Is it really? Remember doing my first install back in middle school, and I don't think I was any special back then.
You do have the nerds thinking they are hot shit for being able to do shit on the command line, but the community seems fine helping out if you ask for it.
No.17536
>>17535The idea of command lines being hard is silly given you can't even do the most basic programming without knowing how to give the computer commands in text.
No.17537
>>17479good bait, i'll bite
There are many stable distros you could use (like fedora, maybe ubuntu even tho it sucks), and you can even use GUI for updating and downloading packages from the repositories. The level of shine, documentation, and maneuverability is there.
The only thing that's different is the 'lid' isn't bolted on. When there's a problem, instead of something simply not working, or you being told to bring it in to a certified professional to fix, you're given the option to fix, replace, or even re-write parts yourself. This is gonna be disconcerting to people who just want the feel of a closed system, which is self-contained, and which is supposed to work (and if it isn't, then it's just a little abnormality that has to be lived with). This aligns with people's desire for authority and a fetishisable self-contained commodity.
Linux lays this all open, and shows how your programs, your kernel, your GUI, are constantly getting updated, added to, patched, etc., and that the code is really made by people, it is huma-readable, and ultimately human editable. It allows you to take an interactive part in your digital property. Most people just want a commodity tho, they don't want like the idea of a 'project', it seems unreliable (it doesn't have the guarantees of a corporation behind it, there's no customer service to complain to.
In the end tho right now linux is very usable, and very stable, less so with certain hardware so i'll take the L on that. The main difference in the end is not how user-friendly, but the perception of a problem when it comes up (a problem to solve, vs the natural breakdown or faults of a bought product, which is only assumed to be fixed by money [tends to be more acceptable to people, they dont have to think "why should i have to learn smth new just to make my computer work!]). You can throw money at a linux just the same though.
If you want boomer customer support, there RHEL. I suppose one last consideration is just the marketing - it's difficult at first to understand distros, why there is no "real" or "pure" or "basic" linux, etc. People tend to trust a centralized tech ecosystem, but there exists within the linux ecosystem various locuses of funding and development, so in the end it's just a shock of too much choice, and the fact that even trying to sort thru and decide what distro is right for you takes time and requires learning. The whole thing probably puts people off. I expect mass personal linux only in socialism. There's a reason why most servers run linux tho. For professionals who have the time to learn, it's almost necessary to have an open system to work on, and a vibrant distributed ecosystem where people share their solutions (which are essentially deterministic anyways because we're all working with the same software, and with limited choices of hardware.) This would be way worse as proprietary solutions racking up royalties. I don't care if companies get some free productivity add - all of society benefits from the free added productivity from sharing solutions. Productivity increases lower the costs of production, and if it's unilateral there's no competition gain even. It literally doesn't impact companies if they get access to open source (volunteer written) software. That's not even the case tho all the time, the licensing does scare away companies and is legally binding. It only helps raise the material wealth of society.
No.17539
>>17533>Well, I didn't say text inputs can't be improved but now that you mention it, wouldn't text prediction and hotkeys (already exist) too make it a massively easierThe fish shell uses past entries to make decent predictive suggestions.
I wonder if some kind of machine learning tool could be used to enhance that.
Using the compute core's of a big gamer gpu to run the least graphically intense interface, that is very appealing, conceptually.
No.17543
>>17540yes, they are in the same spirit as these posts
>>17485>>17488>>17492>>17494and they express nothing more than a linux user's inner ugliness. When I use a product, I expect service and not condescension. But you and your ilk are too ugly and retarded to get that.
No.17545
>>17544but why would I? Professional service doesn't make a turd shine
No.17546
This is quite possibly one of the most useless back-and-forth arguments I've seen, even as far imageboards go
No.17547
>>17546not as useless as linux on the desktop
No.17548
>>17547I don't get it I'm just some retarded manual labourer and all the error messages were self explanatory
I mean are people doing desk jobs on personal computers incompetent and overpayed?
No.17549
>>17548>I don't get it<I'm just some retarded manual labourerexactly
No.17550
>>17547Not really, I use windows mostly but can see use cases for it
No.17560
>>17480> Unix was user hostile.The only person who knows what they're talking about ITT.
No.17561
>>17560Even 3D animators in the 90s could use Unix (that was setup for them by their IT department).
No.17562
It's not, you're just used to Windows because you used it all your life.
No.17563
>>17560We gonna get you some pussy or bussy bro on god
No.17589
>>17479And when are you even getting these error messages? I don't think I've gotten anything like that and the only times I've broken shit is when I install shit for ubuntu on debian or running dd mindlessly (just deleted my external drive, but I was really just copy pasting or something then)
No.17599
>>17479Distributions are all over the place in difficulty. Mint for example is very newb friendly, gentoo on the other hand is very hard (because of it being a hobby distro). Just because linux has error messages doesn't make it inheritily difficult, (especially very cherrypicked error messages that most people don't deal with)
>>17480>>17486If it was only copying then why is linux #1 in both phones os (literally androids success being tied to the freedom philosophy), servers, and super computers? If it was all copying then it just live in the shadow of good software, no?
>>17488Throwing
>>17495You're thinking of the bsd license.
>>17511Purest bait
No.17613
>>17560yeah, it is tiring when everybody accuses me of being a shill, when I have had more *nix experience than all of them.
>>17561the people who made early CGI movies on SGIs were a lot smarter than your average unix-loving IT bro. it's typical nerd cope/sociopathy to think "creatives" are not as bright as them. Your OS isn't hard— it's just a piece of shit.
>>17562or maybe you have become used to a bad design. See
>>17516 (You)
>>17599>If it was only copying then why is linux #1 in both phones os (literally androids success being tied to the freedom philosophy)…Android isn't popular because of philosophy, it's popular because
-it's cheaper than the iPhone
-it's pushed by big corporations like Google and Samsung
-it deliberately rejects Unix philosophy and (as far as possible) the GPL in its non-kernel components
-it copies a lot from the iPhone
>servers, super computersthis thread is about Linux's hostility to the average user. But in a sense I agree, even server jockeys deserve something better
>>17599>You're thinking of the bsd license. lol, you're assuming that I don't know about your licenses. GPL isn't legally enforceable, and doesn't present a challenge to capitalism even if it were.
No.17620
>>17613My point is for Unix workstation the system admin was not seen as the user but the person who had to do their work on them. The system and network admin would have already set every up where for example they just have to copy their files to a given directory and like magic it goes the render farm that would automatically start distributing the assets across the cluster as soon as valid files start coming into it without having to know server commands. Where in NT this was impossible as NT can't comprehend a folder in your local documents folder redirects to a cluster on the network
No.17621
>>17620Not true, NT can mount drives and network resources as folders.
No.17623
>>17621You are not mounting drives though you are mounting the entire render farm input as a folder where by putting a file in the folder you are telling the local machine to send those files with server commands over to the render farm as the user wants to render that.
No.17624
>>17623This can be done on any OS with a bit of programming.
No.17626
>>17624Yet it was easy with Unix do to its everything is a file setup. Where a folder can be an address sitting on a card with little effort in Unix (you do need to take much extra steps when mounting stuff like that but in the end of the day you are doing a special mount with a script). Then you had the fact AT&T had far better documentation for Unix then Microsoft had NT to point the DOJ even in the watered down anti-trust judgement ordered Microsoft had do much better documenting Windows.
No.17627
>>17626You still have to write have to write drivers to turn whatever it is that you're trying to interface to the unix filesystem to present itself as a mountable block device. No different from NT.
The "everything is a file" attitude has led to a lot of jankiness.
No.17629
>>17627To a file system that the Unix system has drivers for. This is why you can make Unix understand even Apple Dos 3.x since as long you tell Unix how to read and write the file system it can mount them with other file systems. And this why Unix workstations were popular with software developers for arcade boards and game consoles up to the PS3 era.
No.17636
>>17629you can write a driver for Windows to read Apple Dos 3.x disks if you wanted to.
No.17638
>>17637They have to do this for the sake of backward compatibility. Unix isn't immune to stupid conventions that only persist because of inertia, either. Prepending files with a dot to mark them as hidden was a very kludgy (and frankly, very lazy) solution, yet was copied mindlessly by generations of *nix implementors.
No.17639
>>17638Who is still running Dos 1.x software? Modern Windows can't even run Dos 1.x binaries anymore without virtualisation like DosBox. it is more that Microsoft never having a plan of how to evolve their platform.
Also not only does NTFS doesn't have this limitation but is case sensitive like *nix file systems as are modern Windows kernel yet for some stupid reason Windows userspace is case insensitive thus you have the common problem of people new making web pages on Windows having their web page call files that don't exist whem they upload it to a web server because Windows will save the file case sensitive but when a Windows application make a call for a file it by default will call that file case sensitive unless you change that in the Windows registry (and Microsoft doesn't document this fact even to this day because Microsoft is still shit at documentation). The end result is Windows making a huge "works on my system" bug as by default Windows refuses to conform to the Internet standard for file names even in the year 2022.
No.17644
If Linux is about freedom, why there isn't an easy distro made for people who only want to play games and edit videos and photos but don't want a closed source system. Is it elitist choice or is it difficult to do?
No.17645
>>17644You can do that with Valve's own SteamOS if you want.
No.17683
the many problems of pc games for linux might be more the fault of driver devs and the game companies and all that proprietary exclusivity
No.17707
>>17613>Android isn't popular because of philosophy, it's popular because>-it's cheaper than the iPhone >-it's pushed by big corporations like Google and SamsungYou're not wrong. all these played a part, (especially with the second point), but the fact that the os was open source (plus it being on familiar software like linux) which made it easy to develop for can not be understated.
>-it deliberately rejects Unix philosophy and (as far as possible) the GPL in its non-kernel componentsSome of the apps now are being switch to closed source, sure, but the os is still open.
>-it copies a lot from the iPhoneIn what way? The fact it has icons?
>>17644The linux community is decentralized, so the approach(es) will be handled by different people/groups, and so what goes into a distribution can massively overlaps with other distributions. A easy distro that does video games and edit videos does exists(!), they don't announce it since there's multiple easy distros that can accomplish that.
(Of course some distros do sell themselves on gaming/further easyness and they do bring stuff to the table to validate those claims, like Garuda for example handling ram like windows for example makes it better for gaming and a example of unique easyness being popos being a great distro to handle nvidia drivers).
So for what you want a os that can edit videos and photos, well if the distro can run gimp (photo editor) and kdelive (video editor) respectively, (which they all should), then you're good.
Similar to games – steam, wine, vulkan, lutris, bottles. emulators – if they work, you're fine.
tldr: they exist, and the distros to check out (in my opinion) are mint, ubuntu flavor (kubuntu), and fedora. I also recommend looking into what desktop environments you might like since they play a massive role in the user experience (I recommend kde plasma) and also play with different distros in a virtual box.
No.17712
>>17707>Some of the appsAlmost all of them, in fact. The linux kernel wasn't used because it was open, but because it was free (as in beer as the nerds say.) This is the same reason why corporations heavily promote open source.
>In what way? The fact it has icons? LMAO. Every feature that has stood the test of time (and usability) showed up on the iPhone before it did on the Android. The making of the iPhone itself was a feat of innovation. It was received poorly by naysayers, blackberry boomers, and seething "apple bad!" nerds, but it ended up being popular. In other words, Apple took a risk, and made it pay off by being innovative— the rest could just copy
No.17713
>>17712The Linux programs used in data centres are mostly open source. The Linux kernel was used due to the Unix wars making Unix stupid. Windows Server always had an insignificant install base due to no server manufacture not having Windows as an option for being pre-installed and a number not having Windows drivers for their system board so you can't install Windows on them even if you wanted.
No.17714
>>17713…and?
It has no relevance to what we are discussing (that Linux is a shit everyday OS choice for most people)
No.17715
>>17714>Linux is a shit everyday OS choice for most people No it actually isn't. That image that OP posted are simply a bunch of error messages taken out of context.
There are plenty of easy to use Linux OSes and Distros out there that are newbie friendly.
No.17716
>>17715But why? I've asked this a couple times on here, but what magic is Linux going to do for me? I don't need to do anything with my OS in particular. I just need it to run software and that works easier on windows.
No.17717
>>17712Yet the sells StreamDeck as fast as they can make them while they run Arch Linux.
>>17716Flexibility it is far easier for hardware engineers to get their brand spanking new hardware to work with Linux then it is with Windows thus why Intel's new GPUs are actually more stable on Linux then Windows as Intel is porting Linux graphics to Windows.
No.17719
>>17712>The linux kernel wasn't used because it was open, but because it was freeIf cost was the only thing that was in play, then why did google use linux over other free kernels like BSD?
>(as in beer as the nerds say.)I don't really get the seething anger you have towards linux. Sure there's some annoying elitists (which is a problem in literally every social circle on the planet), but getting this upset is just not healthy.
>Every feature that has stood the test of time (and usability) showed up on the iPhone before it did on the AndroidLike list features. Because there's plenty of features that we take for granted that aren't iPhone starters, like notifications, moving icons, store to download new apps, etc.
>Apple took a risk, and made it pay off by being innovative— the rest could just copyLike the "risk" they took by copying the mouse from Xeroz?
>>17714Even if you only use a OS as a bootloader for a web browser, it still benefits to use linux. Features it has over Windows/Mac being:
>More stable >Better security>Works objectively better with computers 5/10+ years old hardware>Takes up less space, memory, and cpu than windows & mac>Privacy (Yes yes, I know much of what you deal with on the web will track you, but it's still good to reduce it, plus you get the performance benefit of not having the spyware on your machine).>Customization both on the macro and micro level to use. (If you hate the look of default linux mint cinnamon for instance, you can use a desktop environment like gnome or something else that's more appealing to you. They all werk by the way, (as long as you use the ones recommended by the distro))>Comparability (Windows for instance can't handle ext4)>Package manager (mac has one sure, but you need an apple account)>Because of the decentralized approach competition can occur at a balanced natural state, which pushes more innovation. (Just off the top of my head, there was multiple desktops, file explores having multiple tabs, and much more that happen before windows and mac) There's additional benefits I'm forgetting, and many more you can think of when it comes to comparing linux to a single os 1 on 1. (Windows just having no answer to encrpytion for instance while linux has that).
>>17716 What software specifically? Property software is a road block for linux, yes, but depending on what you're looking for then you can figure out a way to run it on linux, or just you an alternative that's as good or better, (ignoring of course that there is already a linux version of the program).
No.17721
>>17719>[why choose linux over] other free kernels like BSD?driver support
>seething anger you have towards linuxNice try. I have been mostly polite while linux enthusiasts have made some pretty deranged posts.
>notifications, moving iconsiPhone had them from the start
>store to download new appsIt was always planned, and was a natural extension of iTunes.
>Like the "risk" they took by copying the mouse from Xeroz? This has nothing to do with the development of the iPhone, but since you mentioned it: Yes, Apple made significant improvements to Xerox's early GUIs, Bill Atkinson's clever programming that allowed macs to refresh unfocused windows being the major one. Xerox failed because they sat on their asses and even went backwards (tiling windows), what else can I say?
>Even if you only use a OS as a bootloader for a web browser, it still benefits to use linux.A team of computer scientists did a comparison of widely-used modern kernels, including proprietary ones (code was reviewed under an NDA) and there was no discrepancy in either code quality or performance. Linux's so-called "lightness" comes form austerity— once you have a full-featured distro that desktop users will want to use, it's just as "heavy" as any other OS. The only thing that distinguishes it is bad design — some inherited from unix (general user hostility) and some of it quite original (eg. the linux audio zoo)
No.17722
>>17721>Apple made significant improvements to Xerox's early GUIs,That was quickly overshadowed by AmigaOS and TOS, both able to do corporative multi-tasking before MacOS could. Steve Jobs really couldn't fully comprehend what you could do with Xerox's idea while Atari and Commodore looked at MP/M and OS-9 and wanted that with a Mac like front end while the MacOS was just the desktop without able to juggle multiple programs running.
> Linux's so-called "lightness" comes form austerity— once you have a full-featured distro that desktop users will want to use, it's just as "heavy" as any other OSWindows 10 and 11 is a pig, you can do a standard Budgie desktop and have it run in 8 gigs of RAM even for stiff like video encoding while Windows 10 user feel cramped in 8 gigs of RAM just idling. This is why you can get give a used computer new life just going from Windows to Linux.
No.17724
>>17721>driver supportAnd how did it come to be?
>>notifications, moving iconsi>Phone had them from the start
Not true for moving icons, didn't become a thing untli 1.1.3, and notifications I admit I wrote the comment wrong. I was talking about notification center, something android 1.0 had, but not ios 1.0 (took until 5.0).
Look here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_version_history
>>store to download new apps>It was always planned, and was a natural extension of iTunes. Then the concept of a phone app store is not an apple inovation, making them a copier.
>Like the "risk" they took by copying the mouse from Xeroz? >This has nothing to do with the development of the iPhone, but since you mentioned it: Yes, Apple made significant improvements to Xerox's early GUIs, Bill Atkinson's clever programming that allowed macs to refresh unfocused windows being the major one. Xerox failed because they sat on their asses and even went backwards (tiling windows), what else can I say? The fact that apple copied then despite it being famously associated with apple? Or also the fact that innovations like moving apps and having a app store were also not apple innovations but are confused as?
>A team of computer scientists did a comparison of widely-used modern kernels, including proprietary ones (code was reviewed under an NDA) and there was no discrepancy in either code quality or performanceSource?
Also to comment
>>seething anger you have towards linux>Nice try. I have been mostly polite while linux enthusiasts have made some pretty deranged posts. In all the comments (from I'm assuming are yours, no trip codes to work off of and not interested in asking a mod) you post, (including this one), you always interject an insult dogmatically presented as a fact. It's also clear that you're not operating on the slightest of good faith arguing, take a look at this comment:
>Linux's so-called "lightness" comes form austerity — once you have a full-featured distro that desktop users will want to use, it's just as "heavy" as any other OS. First off, complete rubbish, just a basic search of the space required for windows 11 and linux mint for instance gets you 20gbs+ vs 8gbs respectively.
Second the argument falls under the equivocation fallacy. The original comment was talking about linux in the casual usage of an os that uses the linux kernel, and instead in an interest to attack linux you try to flip it as me talking about the other usage which is just talking about it as a kernel. Which is ironic since (I'm also assuming you're the same poster from
>>16692), you got angry over people posting the copypasta of gnu+linux, stating "I call that POS OS whatever I want to. And I call you a drooling autist. ". It doesn't matter what you call those operating systems, unless I can make it look bad, then I'll play the role of the "drooling autist". (Even if you're not the same person from that thread, if you were actually nice then you would've engaged in good faith and not throw insults).
Also not that anon
>>17722, but good comments .
No.17727
>>17722>That was quickly overshadowed by AmigaOS and TOS, both able to do corporative multi-tasking before MacOS couldLisa could do all that and more (advanced memory management, virtual memory, etc.) The Amiga was a good computer, and I have nothing against it, but their (and GEM/TOS's) GUI was clearly inspired by Apple and not Xerox
>Windows 10 and 11 is a pig, I have had little problem using a windows PC with 4 GB of RAM.
>>17724>And how did it come to be? Idealism and gullibility. Tons of programmers receiving no money for their work.
>Source?It was a paper I read as a student. Will attach it when I can find it. Genuinely fascinating read.
>Just a basic search of the space required for windows 11 and linux mint for instance gets you 20gbs+ vs 8gbs respectively. Hard drive space isn't that big of an issue. Performance-wise, I doubt Mint is any better than Win 11, while looking like something from the last decade.
>Kernel vs OSjust about every CS person knows the difference. I'm consistent in comparing like to like (one fully fledged Desktop OS to another) and it's where Linux comes up sort.
No.17728
>>17727>Lisa could do all thatYet we are talking about Mac that came out when we already had OS-9 for the 68k and even the 6809 that had programs reserving their memory and sharing the CPU to create co-operative multi-tasking (that MacOS didn't get till System 5).
>I have had little problem using a windows PC with 4 GB of RAM. Try to edit and encode a video, I can do that with only 8 GB as long as I stay in standard definition even with Firefox still open.
>Hard drive space isn't that big of an issueWith SSDs it is, more so when you are cramming the OS into a SDHC card.
>Performance-wise, I doubt Mint is any better than Win 11, while looking like something from the last decade. You do know there are tons of desktop environments for Linux right? Most highly customizable. You also can have a usable Linux desktop on a jailbroken PS3 (as Linux on PS3 is still updated), try running Windows 11 on a 16 year old platform.
No.17729
>>17728>You do know there are tons of desktop environments for Linux right? Most highly customizableand every one of them is broken in its own way.
>You also can have a usable Linux desktop on a jailbroken PS3 (as Linux on PS3 is still updated)>ramming the OS into a SDHC card. why would anyone want to do any of this?
a running theme in this thread is linux skeptics making a point that Linux is bad for everyday use, and Linux enthusiasts replying with retrocomputing trivia and useless hacks that you can do with Linux.
No.17730
>>17729>why would anyone want to do any of this?Well the base model Steam Deck only has 64GB of internal memory and the other hand held PCs also are constrained in space. As for the PS3 the Cell Processor is a interesting challenge for hobbits programmers where the SPE means you have have a highly threaded program yet you have to work with the limitations of the SPE as they are not really "cores" but co-processors that can pass data to each other. That and those that jailbreak the PS3 like that Linux on the PS3 gives them more options for emulators on the PS3.
No.17731
>>17729The only actual "theme" is people unable to handle a provactor properly, and you who provides either: faulty arguments that when challenged you'll goal shift, or just opinions
Everyone in this thread, (except this poster), just stop replying. This person argues in poorer faith than a pol user.
No.17737
>>17731you're in a cult when you see all criticism as provocation and the only way you can deal with opposing viewpoints is by repeating thought-terminating cliches.
/g/-faggotry is a cult, get out of it.
No.17740
>>17737>Questions Linux's performance compared to Windows 11<Hey Linux works okay on the PS3>But why would you want to?You dodged the point that the PS3 is weaker then even the cheapest PC you can get today when you are talking about using the PS3 as a PC (modern programmers are interested in its architecture not its power thus why nobody still uses PS3 clusters seriously). Then you have jailbroken PS4 being even better Linux boxes and still the hardware is low specs to what you'd expect when you buy a x86 desktop today.
Same with you dodging handheld PCs don't have much storage capacity.
No.17744
>>17740Just buy a new budget laptop. It's not that expensive and it probably incurs lower power costs than trying to run linux on a PS3.
>>17742Another cultist. You don't have power over you machine. You are using shitty software in a vain effort to feel superior.
No.17745
>>17744>Just buy a new budget laptop.Do you lack reading comprehension? The point is that since Linux runs okay on PS3 then it runs far better on even low end modern hardware. Windows 11 won't even run 10 year old hardware without serious hacks as Microsoft doesn't want you running their OS on just any hardware but hardware ordained by Microsoft to be compatible where there is lockout code that just stops the installer if it doesn't like your computer. Meanwhile they are talking about dropping 486 support for the Linux kernel due to the limited command set already being semi-broken in modern iterations of the kernel.
> You don't have power over you machine. You are using shitty software PS3 hackers used Linux to reverse engineer the PS3, because all the tools to peek and poke memory address were right there ready to port. Without Linux the PS3 would never have became jailbroken because Windows doesn't have any near as good debugging tools to start debugging the actual hardware. Hell even Sony's official Playstation devkit went from their own Unix workstation to Linux yet for some reason you seem to think Sony was just doing for the shit and giggles and not that *nix is a better programming environment then Windows.
No.17746
>>17745normal people [floating signifier alarm!] aren't reverse-engineering PS3s, they're trying to watch PatricianTV's latest epic or write the great american novel or draw the great furry navel. if it doesn't empower you to perform these basic tasks better, it doesn't matter how useful it is in obscure use cases.
your next card is "uh actually most servers use gnu/linux, so really it's ordinary desktop computing that's the obscure use case!" No.17747
>>17746You mean the normies that ruined the hobby. The personal computer started out as something new electronic geeks could get excited over. Even when you get into the Amiga and Atari ST these systems out of the box were easy to code on while coding on Windows is the endless torture of Microsoft documentation being garbage along with them just not caring to modernize their kernel with bugs going back to Dos 1.x still in Windows 11.
Also if you just want to write the next great furry novel, Windows offers you nothing that a CP/M machine with WordStar does better or the dedicated MSX word processors.
No.17755
>>17746>caring about normiesif it weren't for network effects I'd happily let them keep being cucked by porky
>>17744I like how you say this while posting on a freely licensed imageboard, no doubt hosted on a machine running some distribution of
gnu/linux, via a browser that links to oodles of freely licensed things like zlib. that's right, you run free software every day without realizing it!
No.17757
>>17744>Just buy a new budget laptop.<idling at 100% CPU usage and 66% RAM usage<64 GiB SSD is too small for Windows updates<comes with Office, but Word crashes<battery life is abysmal<you need to upgrade to Windows Pro to change your web browserI used the predecessor of this model with Linux for 4 years. The battery used to last for a whole day and it even runs portage pretty fast, due to it's specs that would be considered high end 10 years ago for a laptop.
I can verify it is shoddily made (at this point the casing is cracked and the trackpad buttons are hard to press), yet this has so much computing power that is frankly squandered by installing Windows on it. FFS even Android is significantly faster than Windows, because of overall better design and Dalvik magic.
>>17755>>your next card is "uh actually most servers use gnu/linux, so really it's ordinary desktop computing that's the obscure use case!">I like how you say this while posting on a freely licensed imageboard, no doubt hosted on a machine running some distribution of gnu/linuxsamefag
No.17758
>>17747snide elitism crossed with nostalgia for an era you never experienced and probably couldn't have paid the entry fee for.
A computer is a tool, not a toy.
more abstractly and philosophically, it's precisely elitist nerd-wanking that discourages a lot of good people from hobby-computing. >>17755<if it weren't for network effects I'd happily let them keep being cucked by porkyMarx couldn't have put it better himself - workers of the world fuck off, I've undone
my chains!
No.17760
>>17758>muh elitism>>17747 remarked that more high-quality documentation for a system results in better software quality overall and that most modern productivity software offers few benefits over their predecessors, that were often coded by small businesses or former hobbyists.
This means Windows basically gentrified programming and is partly responsible for all the shit we have to wrestle with nowadays.
No.17761
>>17758>Marx couldn't have put it better himself - workers of the world fuck off, I've undone my chains!it's the fucking opposite you cretin. what you and
>>17757 are whining about is what it
means to have control over the means of production, instead of being grateful for whatever crumbs porky lets you have. the entire point is that you should have power over your computer rather than the other way around. but you two are so steeped in slave morality that this notion doesn't occur to you. like the wagie actively participating in his own oppression, so too does the used actively participate in his own subjugation to the will of porky's code. fuck having things that can be maintained just consooom and hope porky doesn't alter the deal too much.
perhaps we should apply this charge of "elitism" to other areas of production as well. in this lens any group of workers who have some semblance of say in the labour process are also elitist. suggestions that we should support cooperatively run workplaces can then be dismissed using the same dumb arguments.
No.17762
>>17758>>17757"learned helplessness" is the term I was missing for the liberal shit you two are spewing
No.17763
>>17759$375 for the ST in 1992 is $796 today. That's not going to break the bank if you're middle income, but it's closer to a Macbook than to a used Thinkpad.
Even the Spectrum was the equivalent of $483 at launch - for the 16k model. Realistically, you're paying $676 for the 48k model.
I might even be cheeky and suggest that having a middle-income orientation explains a lot of the handwringing about the unwashed masses you'll find in computing circles.
>>17760They also remarked that "normies that ruined the hobby", as though the point of computers is to entertain nerds rather than to help ordinary people get things done.
(I barely shaved off a quip about the MSX or CP/M not being able to do one essential thing regarding the furry novel - post it to furaffinity!
though god knows someone on Twitter has probably tried.)
>>17761if workers in cooperative workplaces said
<if it weren't for network effects I'd happily let them keep being cucked by porkyof workers at conventional employers, then yes, they would be elitist swine.
>>17762I'm not going for learned helplessness, I'm going for looking at computing as a means, not an end in itself. Power over the computer is a two way street - if you don't know how to use it, particularly if it's counterintuitive to use, then you have no power over it no matter what license you slap on the thing.
Advanced level theory: If you have to go away and learn how to use it, the computer is now exerting power over you! Now this is mainly as an excuse to attack people who think they're better than others, who'll actively celebrate "freedom" being made as unappealing as possible (you want to configure software? why should I put a menu for that? if you need that you're a normie, just use a config file, it's not my job to educate you…) because it lets them feel smart and special.
The little secret out there is that /tech/ and /g/ would slit their wrists if the year of the Linux desktop ever actually arrived. The real fun is in having a sekrit club, lamenting that normies prevent its tenets from spreading more widely.
Now, perversely, I'm not actually arguing for the dumbing down that you might expect. I draw the line at the level of restriction you'll find with, say, the average phone UI. It's just that this would beak up my flow - as would dwelling more on the macro-level unfreedom that you'll still find in free software, such as web-browsers being a gigantic clusterfuck condemning most reasonably people to put up with whatever shit Firefox is throwing at them this week. No.17764
>>17763>if you don't know how to use it, particularly if it's counterintuitive to use, then you have no power over it no matter what license you slap on the thingmhmm but you're missing the fact that you can have someone you know that
does know this stuff help you out. institutional knowledge! it's a thing! unless you're a user of an OS that doesn't let you do anything. then you're beholden to capital and, since you were warned, you have no one but yourself to blame
let's not even speak of the way porky has foisted helplessness on the masses via le convenient browser
>if workers in cooperative workplaces said ><if it weren't for network effects I'd happily let them keep being cucked by porky>of workers at conventional employers, then yes, they would be elitist swine.if a viable cooperative economy existed then it would be right to treat wagies with smugness and contempt, because the wagie supports porky in his fight against said cooperative. too many comrades act like christoids. stop it.
No.17765
>>17764>unless you're a user of an OS that doesn't let you do anything. then you're beholden to capital and, since you were warned, you have no one but yourself to blameExcept that in practice unfucking Windows to achieve a specific aim is often easier than unfucking another OS, because it turns out the incentives to reverse-engineer the world's most popular desktop operating system are pretty damn strong, and a large userbase all but ensures someone else has encountered the same problem you have - perhaps even on the same hardware. Contrast gnu/linux, where there's a fair chance you're having problems with a relatively unpopular program on a hardware configuration nobody else has tried, with a distro that hardly anyone uses (author's note: any distro), and the problem could be with any of these things! sux2bu!
I'd be comfortable wagering that the level of institutional knowledge surrounding windows on desktop is an order of magnitude greater than that of gnu/linux on desktop, simply as a function of people actually using it. (The inverse is potentially true in a server setting)
>if a viable cooperative economy existed then it would be right to treat wagies with smugness and contempt, because the wagie supports porky in his fight against said cooperative.my one regret is that this nonsense isn't being posted on /leftypol/ so only I get to laugh at your idealism. if i'm to be accused of acting like a Christian, I can only retort that you're a Zoroastrian.
(but hey, it's a nice attempt to slip through the idea that a viable free software desktop already exists. oh, such optimism!)
No.17766
(of course, you could reply with wordplay - "you can't unfuck windows, it's fundamentally fucked by being nonfree". that'd play well to the gallery and avoid engaging with the actual point.)
No.17767
>>17763You also have to factor in disposable income (how many US families had after essentials) not just inflation. Also the 8-bit machines were being sold to stores in 1992 with the C64 not being discontinued till 1994 when Commodore went bankrupt and the bankruptcy having to deal with half manufactured C64s as Commodore was still manufacturing them in 1994. Meanwhile Microsoft doesn't support 12 year old hardware.
>They also remarked that "normies that ruined the hobby"Normies ran to Windows even when the DOJ ruled they were a monopoly that stiffed competition. They adopted Microsofts bastardization of HTML and Java even though Microsoft's implication was the worst version and did nothing but make your code incompatible with the Internet standard that existed before Microsoft cared about the Internet.
> barely shaved off a quip about the MSX or CP/M not being able to do one essential thing regarding the furry novel Game of Thrones was written on WordStar, the old word processors are far more fit for purpose then and you can get just about any old PC online through serial connection to a *nix machine acting as a bridge. Hell someone even got a late Commodore PET to watch Youtube videos through the Linux host encoding the video frames into PETSCII for it.
No.17768
>more people use my shitty os through deals with companies and institutions therefore it's better than gnu/linux even though the latter has numerous distros including ones that just werk for the normies and is more configurable even in those options
why is every poster with a socdem flag an insufferable faggot?
No.17769
>>17767you're right about disposable income, but i don't think it'd change the picture too much either way, and while you could pick up an 8 bit machine cheaper later on, you start running into the problem of being behind the times. (it's a tangential point, but look at contemporary nostalgia - you don't really see people being nostalgic for using a C64 in 1994, even though you could be, because everyone jumps ahead to the Ameeega, even if they'd no hope of actually affording an A4000.)
>Normies ran to Windows even when the DOJ ruled they were a monopoly that stiffed competition.See this is what I don't like - you're blaming users for their consumer choice in OS, rather than seeing that this choice was effectively pre-determined by Microsoft's market actions. Rather than describing a clear evil resulting from monopoly capitalism, you're framing it as users being too stupid to just know-of-and-make-the-effort-to-understand-and-install Linux only to discover lol sux2beU your expensive computer has a winmodem!!
>>17768>implying i don't use a macbut mainly, see the point above: it's not that Windows is better, it's that (a) Microsoft obtained a near monopoly on desktop operating systems using Windows, and (b) as a result of that monopoly status, using windows remains more practical for the average user for both social and software-support reasons.
I mean look at the state of this:
<even though the latter has numerous distros including ones that just werk for the normies That's what the end user wants - a smug programmer telling them that the computer just werx for them. (it does not, in fact, work for them.) oh, but if you don't like it you could always configure it yourself - i'll go get xterm and the punctuation mark soup!
(you don't want an operating system, you want an in group. if everyone moved to xubuntu tomorrow you'd be the first to mock xubuntu normies.)
p.s. i don't actually use a mac, i just thought it'd be funny for you to read this thinking that i did. No.17770
>>17769>you start running into the problem of being behind the times.Yet you'd have more support then with Windows on 12 year old Hardware. Also in 1994 you had electronic geeks from the 70s hot rodding their C64 with JiffyDos (replaces the C64 ROM chips) and putting a 65C816S CPU in it through the edge connector.
>See this is what I don't like - you're blaming users for their consumer choice in OS, rather than seeing that this choice was effectively pre-determined by Microsoft's market actions. But it wasn't. Microsoft held power over manufactures but not the DIY market or small shops building PCs. Anyone could go their local computer store and get their PC built with DR-Dos instead of MS-Dos and store wouldn't care even if you ordered you PC with a blank HD (and the DOJ found MS was stiffing competition going back to Dos 5).
No.17771
>>17770I'd rather try installing Windows 11 on an X61 (2007) than fuck around with gnu/linux on some no-name notebook from 2010.
(a slightly cheating comparison since we're comparing simple installation to actual use, but still.)
>Anyone could go their local computer store and get their PC built with DR-Dos instead of MS-Dos and store wouldn't care This is full blown ethical consumerism, with all the flaws that entails. Yes, some random guy who doesn't know anything about computers is absolutely going to go to a no-name store to probably pay over the odds for a machine he can't even draw up specifications for, just so that instead of using MS DOS he can use the 1990s equivalent of ReactOS. (inaccurate on two counts: overstates the functionality of ReactOS and overstates the open-sourceness of DR-DOS <1995.)
This is unreasonable even by ethical consumerist standards, where the most obvious anti-monopolistic path would be to suggest he get a mac since money is no object in hypotheticals anyway. (let's all gather around and chuckle together as I hit the punchline) after all, Darwin is open source!
yes, yes, Darwin doesn't exist yet either, but if he gets a mac we can assume he'll stick with it No.17772
>>17771Installing Linux is not that hard as long as the kernel is newer then the hardware you are installing it. I've never had problems with Linux on older machines.
>Yes, some random guy who doesn't know anything about computers is absolutely going to go to a no-name store The sales staff of big box stores even then knew next to nothing about computers. While the small computer shops made their money slapping together computers along with doing repairs and upgrades. Also DR-Dos was highly compatible with all Dos program except those by Microsoft due to AARD that was Microsoft's lockout code that threw error when the code detected it was not running on MS-Dos (meaning Microsoft code went out of its way to notice differences). So as long as didn't go into the Microsoft ecosystem you wouldn't have any problems (like use Word Perfect and Lotus instead of MS Office).
>This is unreasonable even by ethical consumerist standards, where the most obvious anti-monopolistic path would be to suggest he get a macWhy would the rational consumer of the early 90s care about Microsoft's ecosystem? Sure IBM picked them to provide the OS in the past but by Dos 5 it was clear they split had ways and IBM forked Dos and was selling its own Dos 5 different from both DR-Dos and MS-Dos. Offices were still running Word Perfect and Lotus 1-2-3 or Quattro Pro so it was not office users that started elevating Microsoft's position in the market but the normies walking into big box stores and buying clone PCs with MS-Dos and Windows 3.x pre-installed and buying MS Office.
No.17773
>>17772there comes a point where running through all the things people could've hypothetically done differently is clearly ineffective given what people actually did, and when i'm thinking "hmm, i should go compare the cost of wordperfect and lotus 1-2-3 to MS office c. 1994" we've very clearly crossed that line. but bringing it up alone is enough to highlight what's conspicuous by its absence - once again - the question of
time and
cost.
ironically, you're more or less putting forward the bill gates argument for why microsoft wasn't guilty of monopolistic practices - "normies just inexplicably fucking
love microsoft products! if they cared for the alternatives, they'd buy them, it's a free market!"
No.17774
>>17773Cost? Most power users then just pirated. You'd just rip the copy of Word Perfect and Lotus 1-2-3 from work.
Also the DOJ found Microsoft guilty of breaking purposely breaking their programs on DR-Dos along with black mailing manufactures that were looking to switch to DR-Dos like Tandy as along with other manufactures they were frustrated with MS letting Dos stagnate prior to Digital Research entering the Dos market.
No.17775
>>17765>unfucking Windows to achieve a specific aim is often easier than unfucking another OSthis depends on the precise nature of the fuckery in question. but also no shit, network effects are a thing. all your argument boils down to is a circular "linux is not as widely used as windows"
>(but hey, it's a nice attempt to slip through the idea that a viable free software desktop already exists. oh, such optimism!)I can't hear you over my actually existing KDE setup
No.17776
>>17774>Cost? Most power users then just pirated.you keep this up i'm going to ask to see some proof of age.
>Also the DOJ found Microsoft guilty of breaking purposely breaking their programs on DR-Dos Ah, but who'd care about using microsoft programs anyway? (except normies, drawn like moths to a flame despite having no actual justifications for doing so.) and what is blackmailing manufacturers when everyone knows you just go to shady sam's and ask him to knock together a computer with no OS for you? (if you're a pleb - i mean obviously a real power user back then would roll their own.)
>>17775>all your argument boils down to is a circular "linux is not as widely used as windows"actually, that's an incremental step in a more involved argument. anon implied that because windows is closed source, you can't fix problems, while due to a combo of open source code and network effects, free software has the advantage - i countered that the network effect behind windows is so strong that it usually more-than-overcomes the disadvantage windows faces in being closed source when it comes to resolving practical problems.
my argument is less that windows is good, and more that windows usage arises from structural factors (like microsoft's near monopolization of the desktop OS market, and, indeed, network effects!) and as such blaming individual users for their OS ""choice"" is fucking stupid. If you want the end of proprietary software, what you need to do is wield the power of the state, the power of class rule, and restructure it all away. not do your best to channel the stereotypes of software veganism.
(and see, this is where one misinterpretation of my argument can be done away with, because you could see my argument as one for making gnu/linux easier to use for the average person - but frankly that's a side issue, mainly useful for illuminating that most people here secretly value getting to be smug little elitists for doing things the tedious way far more highly than they value the freedom of others. [it's their own fault they're unfree, not capital!])
No.17777
p.s. give me my 7's.
No.17778
>>17776You are dodging, you bring up cost but ignore the "Don't Copy That Floppy" campaign made it obvious to even normies they could just copy Word Perfect and 1-2-3 from work and run it on their PC at home.
>Ah, but who'd care about using microsoft programs anyway?It gave Digital Research bad press that leaked e-mails showed was Microsoft's aim with ARAD.
> and as such blaming individual users for their OS ""choice"" is fucking stupid.If they want to keep running Windows they can do so under QEMU and not have to put up with Microsoft's BS as you cen control network traffic easier while also having save states so rolling back Windows to is a hot key away while under Linux.
No.17779
>>17778>You are dodging, you bring up cost but ignore the "Don't Copy That Floppy" campaign…さすが, アノンーくん…
No.17780
>>17779You at the normie that thinks only kids pirate.
No.17781
>>17769>That's what the end user wants - a smug programmer telling them that the computer just werx for them.not a programmer, i literally grew up on windows xp and 7 but i switched to linux because 10 was shit and 11 is supposedly even worse. i'm about as computer literate as every other zoomie
>just worksis not an expression of my smug elitism but rather an apt description for the linux user experience in 2022
>(it does not, in fact, work for them.) it literally does. try any distro that markets itself towards normies, like ubuntu, mint, manjaro etc. literally all of them will run without issue, and will usually run faster than windows on most hardware. windows 10 somehow managed to take up 4.8gb of my ram idle, while endeavour os with xfce4 takes only 1gb, although i'm pretty sure it took 800mb by default. i don't know anyone who would rather buy an expensive updated version of a laptop than stick with the one they already own because the os isn't an unoptimized pile of shit
here's a list of the things most people need from a computer:
>web browser>multimedia player>gayming>office softwarelinux does all of these things well
it's not a more practical system just because of the monopoly and support for software that only professionals need
you can literally not mess with anything if you don't want to
>oh, but if you don't like it you could always configure it yourself - i'll go get xterm and the punctuation mark soup!as opposed to windows, where if you don't like it, you just deal with it and continue getting deepthroated by microshit. it's good that you have the option to go into the configs and mess with them. frankly, i think most people would benefit from using a system that actually teaches them the basics of fixing something yourself, or making a script to make things easier just for yourself and your particular use case
>(you don't want an operating system, you want an in group. if everyone moved to xubuntu tomorrow you'd be the first to mock xubuntu normies.)i don't mock people for their os choices, i just shill linux because it's better than windows and i want more people to use the better os
>spoileri am extremely triggered because i've literally never seen a mac in real life. i'm gonna complain on the sekrit freetard mastodon and then hang myself
No.17783
>>17780not what i'm getting at, but it's more fun to keep you out of the loop.
>>17781Look, you're going down the wrong avenue. We can sit here and litigate about whether it's better to learn scripting and fix some UI element because the guy who wrote the DE was a cunt and didn't just give you a menu option, or whether it's better to install a dodgy start menu replacement on Windows, but it doesn't count for much in the big picture.
The very fact that one has to
switch to gnu/linux means it doesn't work for them. We can sit here and litigate the details of individual software choice all day, it's still not going to shift marketshares a single percentage point. Realistically, there are 3 options: You go full communist and smash Microsoft (my option), you try and make linux actually competitive in the market (arguably the Ubuntu option), or you can give up and admit that you're content with most people using Windows so long as you get to feel cool for using AmigaOS. Microsoft's dominance of the industry is a function of monopoly-capitalism, not a function of insufficient evangelism on the part of gnu/linux users. One would expect that this would come intuitively to anyone on /leftypol/, yet you'd half suspect that /tech/ was transplanted directly from /g/.
you might not mock people for their OS choices or sit feeling smugly superior to them, but others ITT clearly do. (because, as i'd never tire of pointing out, this kind of argument isn't really about the merits of computer systems, it's about ingroups and outgroups, friends and enemies, yada yada yada. not up to writing that part yet.)
No.17784
>>17776>i countered that the network effect behind windows is so strong that it usually more-than-overcomes the disadvantage windows faces in being closed source when it comes to resolving practical problemsthis looks dangerously close to turning an is into an ought
>If you want the end of proprietary software, what you need to do is wield the power of the state, the power of class rule, and restructure it all awaythat is necessary but not sufficient. you also need agitation. I'm not seeing many CPC-funded free software projects for example, at least not in the English-speaking parts of the Internet. perhaps there are Mandarin-language projects that I have missed, but I'd at least expect more participation in the FOSS community than we see
>muh software veganismstupidest argument I've heard so far today. vegans concern themselves with the feelings of objects
No.17785
>>17783While you can say MacOS uses like their UI you can't say the same for Windows. The average Windows user was fine with Aero in 7 (if not they put in a customized desktop) then Microsoft shoehorned Metro (that nobody likes) into the desktop and server editions of Windows because Microsoft had a stupid plan to take on Android.
Linux is not harder for normies to use then Windows. The issue is normies can walk into Best Buy and pickup a computer with MacOS or Windows on it but not Linux. So far nobody is complaining about the SteamDeck running Arch so if normies could just get a Linux machine pre-built from the big manufactures they would put up with its oddities.
Unique IPs: 41