-
Can't embrace what isn't being offered. And when they do offer it, and they've done such a terrible job you're better off going back to software written by people who wanted to write it, you'll blame the users..
You embrace the principle. I assumed you were smart enough to glean that.
And how are we to communicate this to companies who make decisions based upon quarterly sales figures and tenuously legal data collection from their software?
I assumed you were smart enough to realise you can't buy a product which isn't being sold, and that isn't the fault of the people who would buy it.QuoteFirst: are you seriously suggesting that the people who develop Adobe software don't want to do it? That's ridiculous.
They want to get paid. Whether that's the sort of software they're interested in working on is another matter. Have you wanted to do every paid task you've ever done? I doubt it.QuoteOr do you think wanting to develop software for free somehow makes that software better? This is your assertion, so evidence, please!
That is your assertion. I'm sure at some point you've decided to do a job yourself because it was easier to get it right yourself than pay someone else to, however.QuoteSecond: how do you know what drove these software users back to free software? Was it really "terrible", or was it because it wasn't free and the users had confirmation bias?
Experience? For example, I stopped using any version of Acrobat Reader many years ago on any platform because it was a fat, ungodly mess which gets in the way of doing what I came to do - read the document. Acrobat itself was, at the time, the same fat, awful mess with more buttons. I don't recall that they ever found the full version worthwhile to sell - presumably because the majority refused to use what they offered for free, because it wasn't good. What it looks like today I actually can't say - I have tools which do what I need, I'll need serious convincing to pay someone who already made a mess of a job to have another go at it.QuoteThird: but in any case, paid-for software failing is just an example of the free market in action. In the Windows world, software developers have competitors, so the best rise to the top. I would expect this to happen in the Linux desktop ecosystem just the same.
Let me know when it does - they'll have to offer some competition to the existing options first. -
I think I've seen it posted in this thread or others that you can't have a conversation about Windows online without a Linux advocate steering the conversation that way.
And just as equally, you can't have a conversation online about Linux without a Windows or proprietary software advocate steering the conversation to how Windows is better and free software is ruining everything. -
I suppose I must be a diehard. I am not surprised this thread lives on. Holy wars don't end quickly.
Isn't there about two groups here? Linux Desktop users (the enlightened true believer) in one group, and those who use pretty much anything, including Linux, in the other?
Yep, that second one is me. I use Windows most of the time because I really appreciate the wide choice of high quality applications. (Of course there are poor applications as well, but that's fine - I just don't use them). I'm vaguely unhappy with the way Windows is going, but not enough to leave it behind just yet. I can see that time coming, though. On balance I slightly prefer Linux Mint over W11 because it reminds me of my all-time favourite, Windows 7, but I really struggle to find a suite of Linux desktop applications that I like.
So yes: I'll use pretty much anything that supports the apps I want to use, and I don't feel strongly which OS hosts them.I think I've seen it posted in this thread or others that you can't have a conversation about Windows online without a Linux advocate steering the conversation that way.
Yeah, big time! Find any article about Windows on ZDNet or similar, and in the BTL comments you can be pretty sure of finding a Linux advocate saying hateful things about Windows. How fucking weird is that?Now, if stating those facts above makes me a "Diehard"; Well, Yippee Ki Yay!
Unfortunately, no, I'm afraid you haven't earned the "diehard" badge just yet. You made the dreadful mistake of expressing yourself in reasonable, measured tones. Plus you acknowledged the validity of different points of view. Honestly, there's no hope for you. -
And just as equally, you can't have a conversation online about Linux without a Windows or proprietary software advocate steering the conversation to how Windows is better and free software is ruining everything.
No, not "just as equally". I've checked and it is very rare for a Windows fanboy to intrude into a discussion forum or article about Linux. Not saying it never happens, but it is pretty rare.
I think it is mostly because most Windows users aren't fanboys, so they can't be arsed to get into an argument over it. -
But far more important: why do you say I'm an MS fanboy?
Come on, your aggressiveness is just bubbling vigorously under the surface, and some is escaping under the lid of that pressure cooker in every other message or so
If you can't see it yourself, fine. Everyone else can see it. You are exactly similar to those "linux fanboys" you so much enjoy to ridicule. They certainly exist, somewhere, too, but clearly not in this thread - the asymmetry here is just hilarious - like, you rambling on your own. Then again, I ignore Randy222 so maybe I miss something. I don't ignore you because you are a perfectly sensible person despite this funny angry spot directed at your mental image of "linux fanboys", which, clearly for you, means everyone who dares to criticize Microsoft. You don't say that directly, but it leaks out. It is just obvious. It's kinda funny, even. Then again, when you get yourself together, I have nothing against your arguments. You are factually correct in this thread most of the time.
I mean, getting triggered from an actually funny and accurate joke about the infantilization of MS error messages - come on! Most of us can enjoy making fun of stuff we like!
In the context of the thread, SteveThackery has talked about his use of Mint and praised it. I see the frothy you see, but I smell frustration, a lot of it.
I get frustrated myself and have often let myself get overly passionate when I'm trying to push back against the incorrect imposition of my views.
I can't fault your view, or your ignore list though. I'm probably on it.
-
I think I've seen it posted in this thread or others that you can't have a conversation about Windows online without a Linux advocate steering the conversation that way.
And just as equally, you can't have a conversation online about Linux without a Windows or proprietary software advocate steering the conversation to how Windows is better and free software is ruining everything.
This thread provides one example; provide your example of the opposite. I am not saying it's never happened. But that's going to be an awesome find, and I'm ready to read it. -
Second: how do you know what drove these software users back to free software? Was it really "terrible", or was it because it wasn't free and the users had confirmation bias?
Experience? For example, I stopped using any version of Acrobat Reader many years ago on any platform because it was a fat, ungodly mess which gets in the way of doing what I came to do - read the document. Acrobat itself was, at the time, the same fat, awful mess with more buttons. I don't recall that they ever found the full version worthwhile to sell - presumably because the majority refused to use what they offered for free, because it wasn't good. What it looks like today I actually can't say - I have tools which do what I need, I'll need serious convincing to pay someone who already made a mess of a job to have another go at it.
But that is exactly the same in the Windows world. I completely agree that Acrobat Reader is a fat, ungodly mess, and I hope never to use it again. But I would point out that it isn't paid-for software, so I'm not sure where we are going with this.
Anyway, I believe that the Linux desktop culture of expecting software to be free discourages the corporate developers, because they must answer to shareholders, and that pretty much precludes them working for free. And thus we have a shortage of high quality desktop software. -
Quote
First: are you seriously suggesting that the people who develop Adobe software don't want to do it? That's ridiculous.
They want to get paid. Whether that's the sort of software they're interested in working on is another matter. Have you wanted to do every paid task you've ever done? I doubt it.
I think it's a bit weak to assume that wanting to work on a piece of software means you'll do a better job. As a (near) singleton you don't have access to the requirements capture team, like you do in the corporate world. You don't have access to user interface designers, you dont have access to a usability lab, and you don't have access to a team of professional testers.
As for me, well no, I haven't always wanted to do every job I was given. But I honestly think that my professional pride motivated me to do something pretty close to my best, even when I was less than enthused about the task. I don't think I'm much different from most employees working in the field of their choice. -
instead of "Windows", I would like to see MS make a "Doors OS".
"Windows" is itself ironic, there are no windows in the gui (except the MS slogo), just rectangular panes everywhere that you can resize, why cant they make them ovals? I guess they couldn't call it "Panes OS", too close to "pain OS", or like thinking 1/3 is less than 1/4 (which most people think).
-
Quote
why cant they make them ovals?
Massive waste of space, resources and processing power. Plus it would look bad.
Lay out a desktop using ovals and see what you think about it in reality. -
@SteveThackery
I shouldn't be wasting my time, but i'm finding this so hilarious i couldn't resist. The name of the number one windows diehard on this thread is SteveThackery. The proof? Just count how many replies have been posted since my last post, then count how many of these came from you.
You look like Conan the barbarian trying to fight the evil zombie hordes intending to rape his girlfriend. I wonder how much time you are spending in a so useless argument. -
No, not "just as equally". I've checked and it is very rare for a Windows fanboy to intrude into a discussion forum or article about Linux. Not saying it never happens, but it is pretty rare.
I think it is mostly because most Windows users aren't fanboys, so they can't be arsed to get into an argument over it.
Ah, "you've checked". Some of us have lived it, as actual users and occasional developers who are around such discussions. Trolls make sport of it everywhere. Few last long in any places of serious discussion, no matter which side they're attacking.But that is exactly the same in the Windows world. I completely agree that Acrobat Reader is a fat, ungodly mess, and I hope never to use it again. But I would point out that it isn't paid-for software, so I'm not sure where we are going with this.
I made that clear - Acrobat was the same fundamental code base as Acrobat Reader. Had they tried to offer that as a paid option for Linux (I seem to recall they did not), it would have fallen flat on its face as a worthless joke just as their free offering did. That is not the fault of the platform or users, and yet it is the latter you continue to blame for companies not offering products.QuoteAnyway, I believe that the Linux desktop culture of expecting software to be free discourages the corporate developers, because they must answer to shareholders, and that pretty much precludes them working for free. And thus we have a shortage of high quality desktop software.
And I know that the lack of proprietary software prevents people from purchasing it. That is not a cultural problem, because there cannot be a culture of not purchasing something which doesn't exist.
I'm sure there would be less uptake of proprietary options such as Acrobat, Photoshop, Microsoft Office, and so forth should they be offered in a competent, usable form. That will be partially due to users who, to use your pejorative terms, are 'religious', but in large part due to the lack of capture. People already on alternative platforms are no longer the ignorant newcomer, taking bundled software with the OS or computer package as it comes. They've seen they have choices, have made some already, and will continue to make them for their own reasons - cost, familiarity, usability, compatibility..As for me, well no, I haven't always wanted to do every job I was given. But I honestly think that my professional pride motivated me to do something pretty close to my best, even when I was less than enthused about the task. I don't think I'm much different from most employees working in the field of their choice.
And by your professed age I would expect that naïveté to have been thoroughly vanquished.. -
@SteveThackery
I shouldn't be wasting my time, but i'm finding this so hilarious i couldn't resist. The name of the number one windows diehard on this thread is SteveThackery. The proof? Just count how many replies have been posted since my last post, then count how many of these came from you.
And you still have missed three things. I'm not arguing in favour of Windows, I'm arguing against the irrational religious fervour that seems to overcome Linux fanboys. That includes you. It is unbecoming.
Secondly, I'm not arguing against Linux; I'm arguing against what I think are the cruddy desktop apps that Linux users are lumbered with.
Thirdly, I have stated repeatedly that I don't feel strongly about either OS per se, but I have a slight preference for Mint because it is closer to my all-time favourite, Windows 7. I also explained that the poor choice of Linux desktop apps is what keeps me using Windows.
So I'm sorry, but I'm just not the guy you seem to need me to be.You look like Conan the barbarian trying to fight the evil zombie hordes intending to rape his girlfriend. I wonder how much time you are spending in a so useless argument.
I'm spending time in this useless argument for two reasons. Firstly, I'm rather enjoying it. Secondly, my self-appointed job in this forum is to challenge every instance of unreasonable, irrational, prejudiced behaviour, along with all signs of dogmatism and religious fervour. Why? Because this forum is a haven of science, reason and rationality - that is what makes it so incredibly valuable. And people like you, with your swivel-eyed lunatic rants, are poisoning it. -
Secondly, my self-appointed job in this forum is to challenge every instance of unreasonable, irrational, prejudiced behaviour, along with all signs of dogmatism and religious fervour.
You do this by making a point of involving yourself in every mention of Linux or criticism of Windows.QuoteAnd people like you, with your swivel-eyed lunatic rants, are poisoning it.
How many pages of this would not exist if certain people (admittedly, myself included!) could just leave alone things they disagree with? The only reason I get involved is because you never stop. Every thread I visit where people might like to discuss software options, you derail with moaning about UIs in software you don't use. You *could* put your time into making them better, but instead.. -
Wait just 1sec.Quotewhy cant they make them ovals?
Massive waste of space, resources and processing power. Plus it would look bad.
Lay out a desktop using ovals and see what you think about it in reality.
20sq.cm oval is different than 20sq.cm of rectangle,........ how?
I always wondered how 10lb of brick weighs more than 10lb of feathers. Maybe a quantum answer to that.
Just saying, if you wated to take a Jobs approach of just trying to slice bread with a bling machine, an oval laptop display could be it.
-
ahhh, "Ignore", the whiners feature that many board sites have.
I don't use the actual feature, I just skip over the messages of a few (less than 5) posters. -
How many pages of this would not exist if certain people (admittedly, myself included!) could just leave alone things they disagree with? The only reason I get involved is because you never stop. Every thread I visit where people might like to discuss software options, you derail with moaning about UIs in software you don't use. You *could* put your time into making them better, but instead..
Fair point, although specifically and only about Linux apps, because I feel frustrated by the quality of them (a subjective judgement on my part). If they were as good as Windows apps, I'd have moved to Mint by now. That is why I feel frustrated.
I don't believe I have derailed this thread. My argument is clear: Windows won't die until there is a viable alternative. Right now Linux is definitely a viable alternative operating system, but Linux's app ecosystem is not. As for your other point, you are right that I don't use Linux applications very much, but that's because I prefer using my Windows apps, as already explained.
In fairness, I should point out that I have tried quite a number of Linux applications. For example, every office suite I could find. I ended up choosing the only paid-for one: SoftMaker Office. I discovered Inkscape the other day and liked it very much, so that's another app in the bag (though I find Visio suits me better for technical drawings). I've yet to find a suitable bitmap/photo editor. I've used FreeCAD and KiCAD and could live with them. Strangely, I'm struggling to find an email client that I like - Thunderbird is definitely not it.
Anyway, my quest continues...
PS: I'm not a good enough programmer to contribute to app development in the Linux world. 😕 -
I use Linux as well and I generally dislike it. There are so many distributions, packet managers, etc. You want to use some software, chances are you need to compile it yourself. But then you discover you need some dependencies, which need other dependencies. And then there are chances that a particular d pendency is not available for your Linux distribution. Oh, you have Ubuntu? Should have installed Fedora...
Really? Hasn't happened to me in, i don't know, more than 10 years? I run debian at home, and dual boot at work, and everything i use has a package available for it. All the new software i develop for us (done with Qt) is multiplaftorm by design, because i want to use linux as much as i can, the other dev has a macbook, but all the other colleagues and clients use windows.Honestly, Linux sucks for those that need to use professional/commercial software.
That is entirely in the hands of the developers of said software.
though recently there was a wave of ubuntu users being unable to install certain software, because it would fail an integrity check. The file was correct, the reason was canonical jumping on the rust bandwagon (because - unless it was updated very recently - current ubuntu's rust-coreutils are a shitshow: sha doesn't calculate the correct sha, but it does so with memory safety)
One point for Bicurico, i guess. -
There's been a pretty consistent pattern to proprietary desktop offerings: Vendor 'ports' to Linux, puts on the market. Users try it, find it doesn't work properly, has weird and unnecessary distro compatibility issues due to a poor understanding of the platform, performs badly, has compatibility issues with other versions or doesn't support any of their existing files in openly documented formats, and users stop wasting their time with it. Vendor sees poor uptake because it's a worse option than what's already available, stops offering it.
Examples, please! Remember, we are talking about Linux desktop software here, not the stuff that IT Support uses.
-
EXACTLY! That's the very thing I've been complaining about throughout this thread: in my opinion Mint (in my case) is a fine OS, but the apps are anything but. In my opinion that's because there is a strong culture in the Linux desktop world that apps must be free.
A common misconception and oversimplification. There are multiple groups with different views, sometimes overlapping. For example, the open source faction wants access to the source code while many are willing to pay for software. My personal POV differs a bit, I've spent a four figure sum on linux desktop apps (commercial closed source) so far.There is little or no business case for the big players to develop, or port, their apps to Linux. If Linux wants to compete on the desktop, it must attract the big software houses by embracing paid-for software.
IIRC, linux desktops have a market share of about 2% which is hardly an incentive (or business case) for big players to port their apps to linux. Despite this low market share there are companies writing and selling software for linux and many of them are quite successful, i.e. they have paying customers.
-
There's been a pretty consistent pattern to proprietary desktop offerings: Vendor 'ports' to Linux, puts on the market. Users try it, find it doesn't work properly, has weird and unnecessary distro compatibility issues due to a poor understanding of the platform, performs badly, has compatibility issues with other versions or doesn't support any of their existing files in openly documented formats, and users stop wasting their time with it. Vendor sees poor uptake because it's a worse option than what's already available, stops offering it.
Examples, please! Remember, we are talking about Linux desktop software here, not the stuff that IT Support uses.
Thanks for sharing. Linus is always reliably direct.
@tatel should watch it because they think that dependency hell doesn't exist. Even to the extent to claim I have mental problems if I have this issue.@Cyclotron: Otherwise I would have to asses a fellow forum member is mentally ill, and since you are experiencing regularly broken updates, stated that linux is a bad ecosystem to do fleet management,
As I mentioned, if you do any real work on Linux, you'll run into this issue. It's unlikely to sway them as they have a holy war to fight. -
It's true that the Linux desktop sucks. Problem is, the alternatives suck even more (for different/various reasons) so I prefer to stick with the devil I know.
-
It's true that the Linux desktop sucks. Problem is, the alternatives suck even more (for different/various reasons) so I prefer to stick with the devil I know.
I think it's fair to say they all suck and are great in certain ways. Outside of our nerd niches, the "unwashed masses" care very little if at all for the pedantries that characterize much of the "Great/Suck" war threads.
An appliance that functions without requiring them to draw time and attention away from their drool-faced TikTok watch time is what they want. Corporate IT wants ease of management and a fleet as secure as possible. The last segment comprises the folks who require applications to do work or to develop applications for others. These markets are what produce revenue.
macOS, Windows, and ChromeOS have the appliance modes well in hand. Windows and macOS are extraordinarily well-equipped for fleet management. As Linus describes in the video, application developers aim to build binaries for Windows and macOS. Linux can be adopted to do much of the primary markets that I mention, but it isn't likely that the person wishing to pursue that objective is actually a good fit for those markets, so you end up as a niche user on a niche OS.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Linux being your preferred OS for the desktop. The same with Windows, macOS, etc., etc. They all Suck/are Great! -
Corporate IT wants ease of management and a fleet as secure as possible.
I don't care about what corporate IT wants and so far I have never been fired. Probably I'm lucky...
But I agree that many people are using windows because they have to.
-
As for your other point, you are right that I don't use Linux applications very much, but that's because I prefer using my Windows apps, as already explained.
Which is fair enough, but when others use those applications and prefer not to switch to the paid-for alternatives (remember the majority of 'apps' which are not proprietary are portable, so you're actually attacking users of every OS), you decide that must be because of their religion and blame them for your preferred apps not being available, rather than the people who actually decide that.QuotePS: I'm not a good enough programmer to contribute to app development in the Linux world. 😕
You don't need to be a programmer to contribute. But first you'll have to embrace the idea that paying a corporate entity money and praying they do what you want with it is not the only way to get good software. And then second, you'll have to not belittle people willing to give you their work for free for their own reasons..
Of course, this is all ground we've covered before, and you remain stubbornly resolute in doing nothing unless a company sells you what you want.