You’re right that the original configuration takes some extra research and time, but I find for my own setups that the automated setup is worth the investment. Plus then I can version control and automatically provision a new machine instead of a hunt through ever-changing uis. I’d much prefer grepping a directory of files for keywords. Suffering through deeply nested menus to find a setting is a horrible experience for me. I don’t like the control panel, and the registry is difficult to navigate. Maybe you’re using netctl, dhcpcd, or networkmanager - but you made that choice, and probably the initial configuration. I think one of the reasons for the recent popularity of arch is that you are given the choice of, and are made familiar with several of these systems to build your install. Once you know the name of the system, you can read it’s docs, find it’s configs, etc. ![]() So I opted to get used to the terminal, and I totally fell in love with it.įor my (not experienced) level of use, I find that it’s just several different systems. It quickly became clear that you needed a terminal to solve most issues, and when you didn’t start that way, you’re now faced with both an uncomfortable environment, and a problem to solve. There are ui configuration options, but the last I tried them (long ago) they felt inconsistent and painful. Broadcom, in my experience have consistently been the most painful. If you can get a wifi chip with officially supported drivers it’s pretty painless. The driver issue is frustrating, but I think this is mostly a choice of hardware issue. It's not a fair comparison because Linux is so fragmented but to me it remains that the Linux desktop experience is broken in some way for many people who use it. That was before Microsoft ruined it, but my point is there was a clear difference between Linux and Windows and the best Linux distro did not come close to the level of UX that Windows did. Occasionally you had to google and people would give you simple instructions to follow. And on the rare occasions when you had a problem you would immediately know what part of the control panel or the registry to go to and fix it yourself. It used to be that Windows worked for every standard small functionality. It's a million things and pretty basic and essential ones.Īnd it's impossible to debug, you have to spend 10 hours typing obscure commands because the Linux voodoo-priests have never heard of buttons and GUIs. Similarly the USB file transfer UI is broken because the buffer size is too large and it's not been accounted for in the transfer completion calculation. I still haven't got Bluetooth to work right on my current workstation. As recently as last year it took me days to get the Wifi working because of driver problems. Gaming, android/streaming can fill the lack of games, just as you can do on linux.Ī desktop is a million little transparent standard functionalities, you can list everything that works and I'll certainly celebrate it with you because it gets better every year and I love it, but hundreds of broken functionalities remain.Įvery time I install Linux there is something that doesn't work. Now when the m2 mac mini's come out, I might just have to play with virtualized linux as a desktop. Its amazing the power windows can unlock linux The only pure linux I have at home now is pi machine, and I only use it as a console box.īut I still play with Arch in vmware (vmware supports nested virtualization, virtualbox doesnt). Pretty much, Windows with WSL, and Android emulation, you can do anything. WSL is really just a platform to allow you to take the power of the terminal to do so many powerful things, skipping the desktop, allowing a windows desktop that solves all the issues linux has. (Same as Suse)Īrch at least tries to fit the need of letting you upgrade, but you still have the same issues with a unified platform, but provides the applications, some apps are stale but at least they exist in their community repos. ![]() Redhat has the same issue, killing off centos community releases for a streamed os platform. Ubuntu versions are tied to projects, so google and other corps make you use what version they want to dev on their platforms. ![]() Chrome OS has some powerful containers (on supported hardware), unlocking more power. Google Android has the same binary blob hell for drivers. ![]() Its basically a bunch of different flavors with issues that you are stuck with, locked in with. Linux desktop experience does suck, but, BUT, the powerful tools and applications more than make up for it.ĭesktop isn't unified (X11 or Wayland), libraries are not unified, the drivers/sound system isnt unified.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |